Exposures Faced By Directors, Officers, Trustees and Others in Privately-Held and Not-For-Profit Organizations: Risk and Insurance Solutions
By Joseph P. Monteleone, Esq. of Rivkin Radler LLP
This is the last in a series of three articles. In the First Article we explored the exposures faced by directors and officers of privately held companies. In the second article, we will turn our attention to the not-for-profit arena. Lastly, we will examine the insurance solutions to these exposures, particularly through D&O insurance.
Insurance Adjuster Employed by Carrier Can Be Held Liable for Negligent Misrepresentation Regarding Coverage
By Donald A. O'Brien, Esq. of Hinshaw & Culbertson LLP
Bock v. Hansen, Court of Appeal, First District, Division 2, California A136567 (April 2, 2014)
Plaintiff homeowners purchased a homeowner's policy in 2001 that provided additional coverage for debris removal. In 2010, a 41-foot long tree limb weighing 7,300 pounds broke off from a tree in their front yard and crashed into the chimney, the front of the house and through the living room window. Three other large limbs also fell, which came to rest on the chimney and broke three windows and damaged the interior of the home, the fence and one of their automobiles. The chimney was the primary heating source for the home.
Administrative Actions and the Snowball Effect
By Barbara Donnar, CEO of Supportive Insurance Services
If you or your agency have ever been subject to an insurance licensing administrative action, you are well aware of the potential consequences. Not only can they be costly due to fines and penalties, but depending on the situation, you may also need to hire legal representation.
Professional Liability Insurer Wins the Estoppel Battle But Loses the Coverage "War"
By Kathryn A. Formeller, Esq. of Tressler LLP
A professional liability insurer was not estopped from raising coverage defenses despite its delay in asserting its coverage position because the insured maintained control of its defense and suffered no prejudice. The insurer, however, was obligated to provide coverage for the underlying lawsuit and settlement as the "genesis" of the underlying claims constituted "professional services." Rosalind Franklin Univ. of Medicine and Science v. Lexington Ins. Co., 2014 IL App (1st) 113755 (1st Dist. March 7, 2014).
Connecticut Appellate Court Rules Reinstatement of Coverage After Lapse for Nonpayment Is Prospective Only
By Anthony B. Corleto, Esq. of Wilson Elser Moskowitz Edelman & Dicker LLP
When a homeowner's insurer reinstates coverage that was cancelled for nonpayment of premium, can it avoid coverage for a fire loss that happened while the policy was cancelled? Yes, said the Connecticut Appellate Court in the recent decision Brown v. State Farm Insurance Co., 150 Conn. App. 405, May 27, 2014. The Brown court upheld a trial court verdict for the defendant insurer, finding that the acceptance of a premium after coverage lapsed effected a reinstatement prospectively.
|