Showing 8 posts in Insurance Coverage.
Navigating the often-turbulent waters of the Florida insurance marketplace can be challenging for liability carriers, who frequently find themselves having to respond very quickly to what may appear to be unreasonable policy-limit demands made by counsel for claimants. These timed demands typically have three things in common, all of which can understandably be problematic for insurers:
- they come very quickly after an underlying claim has first arisen,
- they are frequently made well before the carrier has been able to adequately investigate the facts and circumstances of the underlying claim or to verify the injuries and medical condition of the claimant, and
- they all too often provide a very short deadline for acceptance--combined with (not-so-veiled) threats of insurer bad faith should the carrier not immediately tender its limits within the arbitrary deadline set by counsel.
As the world responds to the current coronavirus pandemic, also known as COVID-19, insurance companies will now, more than ever, be looked upon to respond to the widespread impact on businesses in all industries, including the impact on employees, their families and customers. It is a virtual certainty that in the coming days and months, employers will face an avalanche of claims relating to exposure to COVID-19. Those employers may look to their Workers Compensation and Employers Liability policies for coverage. Part One of a standard Workers Compensation policy provides coverage for an employer's statutory liabilities under workers compensation law, while Part Two provides coverage for liabilities arising out of employees' job-related injuries that are not otherwise covered under workers compensation law(s). More »
Florida Office of Insurance Regulation Issues Informational Memorandum on Insurer Continuity of Operation Plans on COVID-19
On March 16, 2020, the Florida Office of Insurance Regulation ("OIR") issued an Informational Memorandum OIR-20-03M. In that Memorandum, the Commissioner urged all regulated insurers to heed the guidance memos from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention ("CDC"), as well as the Florida Department of Health ("DOH"), for businesses and employers. All companies regulated by the state OIR are required to review and update all Business Continuity Plans and/or Continuity of Operations “immediately”. Such operations as policy issuance, premium collection, claims adjustment and payment, and policyholder services, must account for DOH and CDC guidance surrounding COVID-19. The OIR required immediate notice to the department by any regulated insurer, if that insurer has had to activate its Business Continuity or Continuity of Operations plans. Insurers must advise the DOI the date the plan was activated, and the name, phone number and email address of the company’s point of contact for continuity plan activation. Further, if in response to COVID-19 any business operations are compromised to the extent it may jeopardize ability to provide essential services to policyholders the company must immediately notify the DOI, by providing detailed information regarding the extent to which business operations are compromised, including how it impacts policyholders, and provide the name, phone number and email address of the point of contact for that issue.
On September 20, 2019, the Director of the Department of Insurance and Financial Services of Michigan (“the Department”) issued order number 19-048-M, which has a direct impact on the ability of automobile insurers to implement the recent Michigan No-Fault Reform Act. Per the Act, most provisions were effective June 11, 2019, with a limited number not taking effect until July 2020. As would typically be the case, on June 11, 2019, insurers began implementing the new provisions of the No-Fault Act. More »
As an update on the changes promised by both political parties in Michigan, this morning the Michigan Senate passed Senate Bill 1, which would significantly alter the Michigan No-Fault Act. A comprehensive review of the bill is being performed by Segal McCambridge attorneys and we will have updates throughout the coming weeks as it pertains to common problems that are encountered by insurers. More »
An Examination of the Illinois Insurer-Insured Privilege: What is Protected and What is Discoverable?
In today’s litigation climate, cases often not only involve a plaintiff, a defendant, and their attorneys, but also insurance carriers who have vested interests in the outcome of cases involving their insured. Prior to and throughout the course of litigation, an insured will often not only communicate with their attorney, but also with their insurer. It is common, for example, that an insurer will take a statement from their insured while analyzing a potential claim. The threshold question of which components of an insurance claim file are discoverable is crucial in a litigated matter. This Article explores the Illinois Insurer-Insured Privilege. A misunderstanding of this privilege can have severe consequences, including the disclosure of material information that the parties believed, in good faith, was confidential, and would never be subject to production. More »
House Bill 1774 (H.B. No. 1774) was signed by Texas Governor Greg Abbott on May 26, 2017, enacting Chapter 542A of the Texas Insurance Code and modifying other existing statutes. H.B. No. 1774 was designed to address lawsuit abuse arising out of Texas weather-related property claims. A summary of the bill follows. More »
CLIENT ALERT: Seventh Circuit Negates Need for a Certificate of Insurance Before Loss - CGL Coverage Exists for an Additional Insured if an Oral Agreement Prior to Covered Event
The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals, in Cincinnati Ins. Co. v. Vita Food Products, Inc., No. 15–1405 (7th Cir. Dec. 16, 2015), has issued an important decision with far-reaching impact on the interpretation of “additional insured” status under commercial general liability (“CGL”) insurance policies. With this decision, additional insureds should have an easier time seeking coverage. More »
- If at First You Do Not Succeed, Try Again Immediately: Illinois Passes Revised Pre-Judgment Interest Statute
- Green Development Risks
- A Question of Timing: Policy-Limit Demands and Insurer Bad Faith in Florida
- CUBI: Everything You Need to Know About Texas' Biometric Law and Beyond...
- Prejudgment Interest Starting as Early as the Time of Injury? At a Rate of 9% Interest? A Bill Sits on Illinois’ Governor’s Desk.
- Now That Vaccine Distribution Has Begun, What Issues Do Employers Face?
- Immunity From Liability For Healthcare Facilities and Healthcare Professionals in the Continuing Battle Against the Covid-19 Pandemic
- A National Approach to Biometric Privacy
- Illinois Appellate Court Says the Learned Intermediary Doctrine Does Not Shield a Device Manufacturer from Liability When a Doctor is Deceived About a Device’s Prior Testing and Suitability
- Remote Jury Selection by Video Conferencing
- Professional Liability
- Class Action
- Complex Commercial Litigation
- Insurance & Reinsurance Litigation & Counseling
- Insurance Coverage
- Cyber Risk & Liability
- Toxic Tort
- Professional Development
- Medical Negligence & Healthcare Liability
- Social Media & Privacy
- Employment Litigation & Counseling
- Construction Litigation & Counseling
- Workers' Compensation
- Pharmaceutical & Medical Device Litigation
- Product Liability
- Discrimination, Harassment & Hostile Workplace Claims