Topics
Contributors
Recent Posts
- Somebody’s Watching Me: A Recent Smart-TV Lawsuit Seeks Insurance Coverage for Privacy Litigation
- Pennsylvania Court Estops Insurer From Asserting Coverage Defense That Was Not Identified in Its Reservation of Rights Letter
- Not All Violation of Statutes Exclusions Are Created Equal
- Still Only Eight Corners?: The Texas Supreme Court Decides Richards v. State Farm
- Headline: "SXSW Disaster: Event Admits It Has No Insurance for Coronavirus Cancellation"
- Maryland Court Orders Insurance Company to Pay Ransomware Damages Under Businessowner’s Policy
- Policyholder Win Under Crime Policy for Social Engineering Scam
- Assault on the Citadel? The Texas Supreme Court Agrees to Reconsider the “Eight Corners Rule”
- Ain’t Going to Study War Exclusions No More... Or Are We? Universal Cable Productions LLC v. Atlantic Specialty Ins. Co. (9th Cir., July 12 2019)
- Federal Court Rejects Effort to Skirt a Policy’s Claims-Made-and-Reported Requirement
A Word to the Wise About Concurrent Causation
Hurricane Season 2019 is upon us as of June 1. NOAA’s crystal ball predicts an “average” hurricane season this year; to NOAA, “average” means “a likely range of 9 to 15 named storms (winds of 39 mph or higher), of which four to eight could become hurricanes (winds of 74 mph or higher), including two to four major hurricanes (category 3, 4 or 5; with winds of 111 mph or higher).”[1] By comparison, NOAA predicted that 2018, which produced Hurricane Michael, the first Cat 5 hurricane to come ashore in the continental U.S. since 1992, would be “near or above-normal.”[2] And 2017 produced Harvey, Irma, Maria and Nate. Read More ›
Do TCPA Claims Trigger CGL Coverage? The California Supreme Court Agrees to Decide
The California Supreme Court has agreed to decide for the first time whether class actions alleging violations of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (“TCPA”)—which prohibits certain unsolicited fax, telephone or text message advertisements—are covered by a CGL insurance policy. See Yahoo! Inc. v. National Union Fire Ins. Co. of Pittsburgh, Pa., Case No. S253593 (Cal. S. Ct., March 27, 2019). The Ninth Circuit asked the California Supreme Court to resolve the issue as a certified question of unresolved state law. See Yahoo! Inc. v. National Union Fire Ins. Co. of Pittsburgh, Pa., 913 F.3d 923, 926 (9th Cir. 2019). Read More ›
All Stop: Ruling on the Applicability of Exclusion to BIPA Claims Delayed
The fallout from the Illinois Supreme Court’s January 25, 2019, opinion in Rosenbach v. Six Flags Entertainment Corp., 19 IL 12316, continues. Rosenbach settled the dispute of who qualifies as an “aggrieved person” under the Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act (“BIPA”), and in doing so opened the floodgates for this litigation to proliferate. The immediate result was a sharp increase in the filing of BIPA class actions as well as the lifting of stays of the numerous cases pending that were awaiting the Rosenbach ruling. Read More ›