President Obama's ACA Extension - NAIC Response
By Sarah J. Delaney, Esq. and Fallyn B. Cavalieri, Esq. of Goldberg Segalla LLP
With the January 2014 effective date under the Affordable Care Act's (ACA) essential benefits and guaranteed coverage provisions quickly approaching, several million people have received a cancellation notice. Facing wild criticism, President Obama responded with a regulatory fix that will allow Americans to keep ACA non-compliant insurance policies, albeit temporarily.
The California Court of Appeal Bars Assignee's Claim Against Broker Under the Superior Equities Doctrine and Refuses to Expand Broker's Duty to Procure Insurance
By Daniel S. Clark, Jr., Esq. of Hinshaw & Culbertson LLP
Summary
The assignee of an insured sought to expand the current duty of a broker to impose implied obligations to procure prior-competed-work coverage, even when not requested by the insured. Before reaching this issue, the Court of Appeal for the Fourth Appellate District, in an unpublished decision, determined that the superior equities doctrine barred the assignee's claim against the broker because the broker neither caused nor intended to indemnify for the loss at issue. The Court also declined to expand a broker's legal obligations to procure insurance and stated that it was the purview of the Legislature, not the courts, to change the law.
How to Draft an Effective Malicious Prosecution Exclusion (If You Can)
By Joseph P. Monteleone, Esq. of Tressler LLP
Many, but not all, D&O policies contain a personal injury exclusion and, among the specific torts listed in those exclusions, there is sometimes included "malicious prosecution" or some variant thereof. A recent 10th Circuit decision illustrates the perils of not specifically and accurately describing the tort. Carolina Cas. Ins. Co. v. Nanodetex Corp., No. 12-2110, 2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 17181 (10th Cir. August 19, 2013)[1]. [See here for a link to the decision].
By Paul V. Tatlow, Esq of Marshall Dennehey Warner Coleman & Goggin, P.C.
Matthew Chapman v. Dentsply Caulk, (IAB #1397867 - Decided September 30, 2013)
This case involved a petition to determine compensation due filed on behalf of the claimant alleging that his motor vehicle accident on July 2, 2012, occurred during the course and scope of his employment and, therefore, was compensable.
|