Coverage

Covid-19 Closures and the Reasonable Expectations of a Commercial Insured is still undecided in Pennsylvania (PA)

COVID-19 related insurance litigation has often left insurers with more questions than answers. In Brown’s Gym, Inc. v. The Cincinnati Ins. Co., another open question of law in Pennsylvania is being looked at in relation to such a COVID-19 initiated case. Here, the Court of Common Pleas of Pennsylvania in Lackawanna County recently ruled that a case by a commercial insured looking to sue...Read More

Insurer’s Assault and Battery Exclusion upheld in Bronx County Supreme Court for a Slip and Fall Arising from Spilled Drinks during a Club Melee (NY)

Quanisha Simmons commenced a personal injury action against Blvd Bar & Lounge nightclub, located in Westchester County, New York, when she slipped and fell on a puddle of spilled drinks, which was on the floor due to “a melee which erupted within and without the club.” Simmons testified that she was pushed, shoved, and trapped in the bar at her deposition, and when she took a step toward...Read More

Conclusory Allegations of Bad Faith Against Insurer Insufficient to Survive Motion to Dismiss (PA)

Recently, in Daniel Dietz v. Liberty Mutual Insurance Company, the Eastern District of Pennsylvania considered whether the factual averments in the plaintiff’s complaint were sufficient to overcome Liberty Mutual Insurance Company’s partial motion to dismiss Dietz’s bad faith claim pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). By way of brief background, Dietz was involved in a motor...Read More

Excess Coverage: Unlimited Exposure for the Excess Carrier? (PA)

In Jin Ming Chen v. Insurance Company of the State of Pennsylvania (Ct. of Appeals, 2020), Plaintiff commenced a personal injury suit after sustaining an injury at a construction site. At the time of the suit, defendant Kam Cheung Construction maintained both primary and excess coverage. The combined coverage limits totaled five million dollars per occurrence: one million per occurrence from...Read More

COVID Court Ruling (NY)

Adding to the quickly growing body of COVID-related insurance case law, a New York federal judge recently held that an art gallery could not recover financial losses due to government-mandated closures, finding that there was no “direct physical loss” as required by the policy. The Guy Hepner art gallery in Chelsea had a policy with Sentinel Insurance Company which contained a “business...Read More

Three Strikes and You’re Out on Coverage: COVID-19 Business Interruption Claim Fails (PA)

Of course, COVID-19 and accompanying shutdown orders impact on business interruption claims are still among the most pressing issues facing the courts.  In Toppers Salon & Health Spa Inc v Travelers Property Casualty Company of America, the Eastern District of Pennsylvania has provided one of the most definitive answers on the issue with its rejection of an insured’s business interruption...Read More

Business Interruption Claims in the Covid-19 Era: The Trend Continues

Earlier this week, a federal judge in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida dismissed a lawsuit seeking coverage for losses associated with the COVID-19 pandemic. In El Novillo Restaurant, et al. v. Certain Underwriters at Lloyd’s, London, et al., the plaintiffs filed suit seeking coverage for business income losses due to Covid-19.  In response to the amended complaint,...Read More

Follow Form Excess Policy Does Not “Drop Down” Following Rescission of Primary Policy (NY)

In a split-decision, the New York Court of Appeals recently ruled in favor of excess insurer Insurance Company of the State of Pennsylvania (ICSOP), finding that the policy follow-form provision did not override the policy’s defined limits of coverage. The coverage dispute involved the insurance contracts covering general contractor Kam Cheung Construction for a personal injury suit brought by...Read More

NJ Federal Court Rejects E&O Insured’s Claim for Spoofing Loss

In Authentic Title Services, Inc. v. Greenwich Insurance Company, et. al, the District Court of New Jersey held that coverage was barred under an E&O Policy for a loss resulting from a spoofing scam based on an exclusion for claims resulting from “misappropriation” of funds. The insured, Authentic Title Services, obtained a Title Professional Liability Errors and Omissions policy from...Read More

Stolen Car or Implied Consent? Look Beyond the Driver’s Seat (NJ)

During a night of imbibing, Galvan-Martinez asked his good friend Munoz for a ride to work the following morning. Munoz responded non-committedly, stating that he would “if he had time.” A few drinks later, Munoz walked home, leaving his keys behind. The next morning Munoz received a phone call from his friend advising that he had driven Munoz’s vehicle to work and been involved in an...Read More