FindLaw Opinion Summaries - Insurance Law

General Star Nat. Ins. Co. v. Universal Fabricators, Inc.

Thu, 5 Nov 2009 20:00:02 PDT

(U.S. 2d Cir., Construction, Contracts, Insurance Law) In an action claiming that defendant insurer was bound by the terms of an excess insurance policy it had issued to contribute to the satisfaction of a state-court judgment of liability in a personal injury action against two entities for whom the insured had been a contractor, summary judgment for plaintiffs is reversed where the district court erred in deciding that the state-court judgment established legal liability against the insured.

World Harvest Church, Inc. v. GuideOne Mut. Ins. Co.

Fri, 30 Oct 2009 21:00:02 PDT

(U.S. 11th Cir., Contracts, Insurance Law) In an action against an insurer claiming that the insurer was estopped from contesting that a judgment against plaintiff was covered by the policy, the court of appeals certified the following questions to the Georgia Supreme Court: 1) does an insurer effectively reserve its right to deny coverage if it informs the insured that it does "not see coverage," after the insured had received a written reservation of rights from the insurer's sister company in a similar lawsuit in another jurisdiction, or is a written or more unequivocal reservation of rights required?; 2) when an insurer assumes and conducts an initial defense without notifying the insured that it is doing so with a reservation of rights, is the insurer estopped from asserting the defense of noncoverage only if the insured can show prejudice, or is prejudice conclusively presumed?; and 3) if the insured must show prejudice, do the facts and circumstances of this case show it?

Guillemaro-Ginorio v. Contreras-Gomez

Thu, 29 Oct 2009 21:00:02 PDT

(U.S. 1st Cir., Civil Rights, Constitutional Law, Government Contracts, Government Law, Injury And Tort Law, Insurance Law) In plaintiffs' case against the Office of the Insurance Commissioner of Puerto Rico and two consecutive Insurance Commissioners claiming that they were investigated and sanctioned for Insurance Code violations solely because of their political affiliations, district court's judgment in favor of the plaintiffs in the amount of $4.7 million and a permanent injunction is affirmed as all of defendants' grounds for relief are without merit.

Cox v. Standard Ins. Co.

Thu, 29 Oct 2009 21:00:02 PDT

(U.S. 6th Cir., Administrative Law, ERISA, Health Law, Insurance Law, Labor & Employment Law) In plaintiff's ERISA case, district court's judgment on the administrative record approving defendant's discontinuance of plaintiff's long-term disability benefits is affirmed as, taking the record as a whole and applying the highly deferential arbitrary and capricious standard, defendant's decision appears to have been based on a principled and deliberative reasoning process.

Zhang v. Sup. Ct.

Thu, 29 Oct 2009 21:00:02 PDT

(Cal. App., Commercial Law, Consumer Protection Law, Ethics & Professional Responsibility, Government Law, Insurance Law) In plaintiff's action against her insurer over disputes arising from a fire of her commercial premises, district court's ruling sustaining defendant's demurrer to a cause of action under the Unfair Competition Law (UCL), Business and Professions Code section 17200, is vacated and remanded with directions to reinstate the cause of action as an insurer connected with conduct that would violate Insurance Code section 790.03 can also give rise to a private civil cause of action under the UCL.

Standard Ins. Co. v. Morrison

Wed, 28 Oct 2009 20:00:02 PDT

(U.S. 9th Cir., ERISA, Insurance Law) In an action claiming that a state's practice of disapproving insurance policies with clauses vesting discretion in insurers violated the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA), summary judgment for defendant-state insurance commissioner is affirmed where: 1) the state's bar on discretionary clauses addresses an insurance-specific problem, because discretionary clauses generally do not exist outside of insurance plans; and 2) the commissioner's practice merely alters the terms by which the presence or absence of the insured contingency is determined; and 3) thus, the state regulatory scheme was saved from preemption under 29 U.S.C. section 1144(a) by the savings clause in section 1144(b).

Westchester Fire Ins. Co. v. Mendez

Wed, 28 Oct 2009 20:00:02 PDT

(U.S. 9th Cir., Civil Procedure, Contracts, Insurance Law, Sanctions) In an action by an insurer seeking a declaration that it had no obligation to defend or indemnify defendant against a certain claim because he failed to give proper notice of the claim to insurer, default judgment for plaintiffs is reversed where intervenor-Northwest Airlines should have been permitted to defend the declaratory relief action on its own.

James River Ins. Co. v. Kemper Cas. Ins. Co.

Wed, 28 Oct 2009 20:00:02 PDT

(U.S. 7th Cir., Contracts, Insurance Law, Professional Malpractice) In plaintiff-insurer's case seeking a declaration that it had no duty to defend or indemnify two lawyers who were sued for malpractice, district court's grant of summary judgment in favor of defendant-insurer is reversed with instructions to enter the declaratory judgment requested by plaintiff as its policy does not apply since it excludes coverage of conduct covered by a prior insurer, and all the wrongful acts alleged in the malpractice suit arose from events that took place in defendant's policy period.

G-I Holdings v. Reliance Ins. Co.

Mon, 26 Oct 2009 20:00:02 PDT

(U.S. 3d Cir., Civil Procedure, Contracts, Corp. Governance, Corporation & Enterprise Law, Insurance Law) In plaintiff's action involving coverage under a directors and officers insurance policy brought against defendant Hartford, who had taken over claims administration for defendant-Reliance (liquidated insurer) and assumed some of its liabilities, district court's grant of summary judgment in favor of Hartford is affirmed where: 1) the Hartford policy period does not include the amended Reliance policy period, and there is no basis to conclude that plaintiff could have reasonably expected its policy with Hartford to cover the Reliance policy; 2) the interrelated wrongful acts provision applies to bar coverage for the CCR and Claimants Committee actions under the Hartford policy; 3) other agreements do not make Hartford directly liable for fraudulent conveyance actions; and 4) judicial estoppel does not apply to Hartford's invoking of the interrelated wrongful acts provision.

Kaldenbach v. Mut. of Omaha Life Ins. Co.

Mon, 26 Oct 2009 20:00:02 PDT

(Cal. App., Civil Procedure, Class Actions, Injury And Tort Law, Insurance Law) In plaintiff's consumer protection and fraud suit against defendant-insurance company concerning the sale of a so-called "vanishing premium" life insurance policy, denial of plaintiff's motion for certification of the action as a class action is affirmed as the court did not err in concluding that he had not demonstrated any of the requisites for class certification.

College of Dental Surgeons of Puerto Rico v. Connecticut Gen. Life Ins. Co.

Thu, 22 Oct 2009 20:00:02 PDT

(U.S. 1st Cir., Civil Procedure, Class Actions, Health Law, Insurance Law) In plaintiffs' class action lawsuit against defendants, judgment of the district court remanding the case is vacated and remanded as the court determined prematurely that it lacked Class Action Fairness Act (CAFA) jurisdiction on the ground that the complaint does not specifically define a proposed class.

In Re: Safeco Ins. Co. of America

Thu, 22 Oct 2009 20:00:02 PDT

(U.S. 7th Cir., Civil Procedure, Class Actions, Consumer Protection Law, Contracts, Insurance Law) In plaintiffs' class action lawsuit against defendant-automobile insurance providers, defendant's petition for permission to appeal is granted and the judgment of the district court granting plaintiff's motion to remand the action to the state court is affirmed where the new claims added by the class certification order relate back to the relevant transaction or occurrence.

Mega Life & Health Ins. Co. v. Pieniozek

Mon, 19 Oct 2009 20:00:03 PDT

(U.S. 11th Cir., Civil Procedure, Contracts, Insurance Law) In an action seeking rescission of defendant's life insurance policy, judgment for defendant is affirmed where: 1) the district court properly determined that no timely jury demand was filed and served by either party with respect to the only issue before it on remand; and 2) the district court did not err in concluding the term "annual income" in the policy was ambiguous.

First Am. Bank v. First Am. Trans. Title Ins. Co.

Thu, 15 Oct 2009 20:00:04 PDT

(U.S. 5th Cir., Contracts, Insurance Law) In an action seeking the proceeds of a maritime insurance policy, partial summary judgment for defendant, holding that the measure of indemnity was limited under the policy to the amount by which the payments to the holders of the priming liens for necessaries reduced plaintiff's recovery on its mortgages, is affirmed in part where the policy did not allow recovery of consequential damages. However, the order is reversed in part where the difference in values was not to be determined solely by the proceeds recovered from the foreclosure sale at issue.

Century Indem. Co. v. Certain Underwriters at Lloyd's, London

Thu, 15 Oct 2009 20:00:04 PDT

(U.S. 3d Cir., Commercial Law, Contracts, Dispute Resolution & Arbitration, Insurance Law) District court's orders granting defendant-Lloyd's motion to compel arbitration of a disputed claim based on a set of reinsurance-of-reinsurance agreements and denying plaintiff-Century's motion to vacate an arbitration panel's subsequent award in favor of Lloyd's is affirmed where: 1) district court properly compelled arbitration of the dispute arising from the retrocessional agreements over Lloyd's failure to pay declaratory judgment expenses that Century had paid to its reinsured under reinsurance treaties; and 2) the district court properly denied Century's motion to vacate the arbitration award under 9. U.S.C. section 10(a)(3) as the arbitrators' decision to exclude evidence plaintiff proffered based on the evidence's irrelevance was well within their authority in conducting the arbitration.