Following the July 6, 2013, crash of Asiana Flight 214 in San Francisco, the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) fined Asiana Airlines $500,000 for failing to assist passengers' families in accordance with the Foreign Air Carrier Family Support Act of 1997 (the Act). The forerunner of the bill was the Aviation Disaster Family Assistance Act of 1996, which was enacted following several major aviation accidents in which the air carriers, local responders and federal agencies did not effectively work together to provide for the needs of the family members and survivors. The Act was drafted with the purpose of providing the necessary information, services and support to family members of passengers, and to better organize the response of the air carriers, federal agencies and local responders to an aircraft disaster.
Et Tu, Neighbor?: Multiple Carbon Monoxide Injuries in Apartment Complex Deemed A Single Occurrence
By Joanna M. Roberto, Esq. and Paul C. Steck, Esq. of Golberg Segalla LLP
This environmental coverage action arises out of a carbon monoxide exposure and poisoning of multiple tenants in an apartment complex serviced by a gas boiler furnace located in the basement of the unit.
A declaratory suit was initiated against the complex owner and the insurer seeking a declaration that claimants are entitled to a separate occurrence limit and that the damages sustained by each group of tenant plaintiffs constituted separate occurrences under the policy. Here, the subject policy defined "occurrence" as "an accident, including continuous or repeated exposure to substantially the same general harmful conditions." The policy at issue provided a per occurrence limit of $1,000,000 and a general aggregate limit of $2,000,000. Claimants contended that since the injuries to the two families, occupying separate apartments, took place over the course of an evening and each apartment was exposed to different levels of carbon monoxide, there was more than one occurrence. Conversely, the insurer argued that there was one cause of claimants' injuries; thus only one occurrence.
No Place Like Home: Forum-Selection Clauses
By Robert Stellwagen, Esq. and Erin Dunkerly, Esq. of Collins Collins Muir + Stewart LLP
As the economy continues to improve and more projects come to life, the United States Supreme Court is helping by finally bringing certainty to where your out-of-state (and out-of-country) dispute can be resolved. The Supreme Court has unanimously determined in Atlantic Marine Construction Co. v. United States District Court for the Western District of Texas that you can indeed choose where you are sued.
Four Issues to Consider when Writing EPL Coverage for Staffing Firms
By Dave Kengott of Executive Strategies, Inc.
When we address the topic of Employment Practices Liability with our Staffing Firm clients, we are often told, "That won't happen to me." Research on this topic has found that it can happen to anybody and everybody. So we again ask the questions, do you know your Ultimate Cost of Risk (UCOR) today and what are you doing to reduce your UCOR for tomorrow?
Covered Antitrust Claim Not Subject To Coverage Defenses Relating To Disgorgement - Unpaid Wage Issues
By Joseph Monteleone, Esq. of Tressler LLP
On January 16, 2014, the Sixth Circuit held that settlement of litigation involving antitrust allegations arising from hospitals' alleged underpayment of nurses' wages was not disgorgement that would be outside the scope of coverage under a hospital's D&O policy. William Beaumont Hospital v. Federal Ins. Co., No. 13-1468, (6th Cir. January 16, 2014) [See here for a link to the Opinion]
