During the first week of October two separate District Courts, for the Northern District of Georgia and the Central District of California, issued Orders granting the respective motions to dismiss filed by insurer defendants arguing that their policies provide no coverage for a restaurant insureds’ claim for business income coverage alleging losses stemming from Covid-19 closures.
In Figuero v. Meitzner, the Plaintiff, a delivery driver for Fed-Ex, slipped on an icy sidewalk while delivering a package to the Defendant. The Plaintiff sought damages and the jury held the Plaintiff 40% liable and the Defendant 60% liable, awarding $1.5 million in damages to the Plaintiff.
The Defendant appealed the trial court’s denial of a Judgment Notwithstanding the Verdict, arguing the...Read More
In Napolitano v. Jackson “78” Condominium, the Appellate Division, Second Department addressed whether the defendants were entitled to summary judgment when plaintiff tripped while stepping into an elevator owned and/or managed by the defendants.
The Supreme Court granted the defendants motions for summary judgment to dismiss the complaint insofar as asserted against them....Read More
In Conrad v. Holiday Valley Inc., plaintiff slipped and fell on a stairway landing while playing golf at defendants’ golf course. He ascended a stairway used to access the tee box on the twelfth hole and then took a measurement from the tee box using his range finder. When he went to return to his golf cart, he stepped onto the landing at the top of the stairway, slipped on a wooden...Read More
The Eastern District of Pennsylvania recently dealt with an attorney filing a lawsuit after her law firm was forcibly shut down as a result of the Coronavirus pandemic. In Rhonda Hill Wilson, et al. v. Hartford Casualty Co., et al. the District Court granted the defendants’ motions to dismiss for failure to state a claim after determining that the plaintiffs’ claims were barred by the virus...Read More
In Philadelphia Indem. v. Streb, the Southern District of New York explored an emerging exception to New York’s four corners rule, which restricts the use of extrinsic evidence outside of the complaint when determining coverage. The court ruled that although the facts triggering a policy exclusion for trampoline use were not included in the complaint, the exclusion should still apply since the...Read More
The matter of Pareja v. Princeton International Properties arose out of a slip and fall in front of the defendant’s store due to ice. Plaintiff had fallen while sleet was still falling. The trial court granted defendant’s motion for summary judgment pursuant to the ongoing storm rule that holds that the landowner or possessor’s duty to take reasonable steps to make safe abutting walkways...Read More
In a recent case decided by the New York Supreme Court, an insurer sought summary judgment on its action seeking defense and indemnity from another insurer. The Court rejected the insurer’s summary judgment motion, holding coverage for additional insureds is limited to situations where the insured is the proximate cause of the injury. The Court found “liability exists precisely where there is...Read More