In Mississippi Farm Bureau Casualty Insurance Co. v. Peteet, 359 So.3d 181, (2023), the Court held that before an insured can seek UM benefits from his or her automobile insurer, the insured must establish that the insurer gave consent to the settlement under the...
Firm News
FALLNG ROCKS DO NOT GIVE RISE TO PROFESSIONAL LIABILITY EXCLUSION
In State Auto Property & Casualty Insurance Co. v. Pritchard Engineering, Inc., 2023 WL 2731042 (N.D. Miss. 03/30/23), the Court considered whether a professional liability exclusion within a commercial general liability policy prevented coverage for claims based...
ASSAULT AND BATTER EXCLUSION STRICTLY APPLIED, NOTWITHSTANDING MENTAL INFIRMITY
In a case of first impression, the Ohio Supreme Court ruled that an assault and battery exclusion in the CGL policy was valid in precluding coverage in a situation where a resident of the insured’s care facility assaulted the plaintiff. The resident was acting under...
RECOUPMENT OF DEFENSES COSTS WHEN OFFERING A RESERVATION OF RIGHTS DEFENSE
Interpreting Georgia law, the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals in Continental Casualty Co. v. Winder Laboratories, LLC, 73 F.4th 934 (11th Cir. July 13, 2023) (interpreting Georgia law) concluded that insurance companies could not recoup defense costs expended before a...
REGULAR USE EXCEPTION UPHELD BY TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS IN A PERSONAL UNINSURED MOTORIST POLICY
In Progressive County Mutual Ins. Co. v. Freeman, 694 S.W.3d 924, (Tex. App. [Houston], 2024), the injured claimant was occupying a police patrol car as a member of the Houston Police Department. The tortfeasor who caused the accident had a per person policy limit of...
THE DECK IS NOT STACKED IN FAVOR OF COVERAGE
In Kuhn v. Owners Ins. Co., 241 N.E.3d 397, 2024 Ill. 129895 (Ill. May 23, 2024), the Illinois Supreme Court issued an anti-stacking decision involving situations where an insurance policy insured multiple vehicles. In this case, Owners Insurance Co. issued a...
THE SUPREME COURT OF SOUTH CAROLINA RICOCHETS ON THE ISSUE OF COVERAGE FOR DELIBERATE SHOOTINGS UNDER UIM COVERAGE
In Progressive Direct Insurance Co. v. Groves, 882 S.E.2d 464, 2022 (S.C. 2022) rehearing denied (2023), the South Carolina Supreme Court reversed the trend in coverage regarding deliberate shootings. In Groves, Jimi shot another driver while stopped at a stop light,...
CONTRACTOR WHO PERFORMS WORK ON A NEBRASKA HOUSE CANNOT BRING A FIRST PARTY BAD FAITH CASE AGAINST THE INSURER THROUGH ASSIGNMENT
In Millard Gutter Co. v. Shelter Mutual Ins. Co., 312 Neb. 606, 980 N.W.2d 420 (Neb. 2022), the Nebraska Supreme Court held that an insured’s assignee lacked standing to bring a first party bad faith lawsuit in Nebraska. This case involved Millard Gutter Company as...
FAULTY PLEADING RESULTS IN LACK OF BUSINESS INTERRUPTION COVERAGE ALLEGEDLY CAUSED BY COID-19
The Oklahoma Supreme Court recently rejected an Indian tribe’s Covid-19 business interruption claim. In Cherokee Nation v. Lexington Ins. Co., 2022 Ok. 71, 521 P.3d 1261 (2022) rehearing demand 12/19/2022, the insured Indian tribe sought coverage under its tribal...
LOUISIANA COURT RULES THAT INSURER WAS NOT OBLIGATED TO DEFEND SUCCESSOR CORPORATION IN ASBESTOS LITIGATION
In Brilliant National Services, Inc. v. Travelers Indemnity Co., 349 S.3d 581 (La. App. 2022), the insured had exposed various individuals to asbestos. The insured later transferred some of its assets to a successor company. The Court found that the transferred...