In a case involving the sealing of records generated by an insurance company, the Hawaii Intermediate Court of Appeals found that communications between the insurer and its in-house counsel were not privileged and should not be sealed. Roy v. Government Employees Ins. Co., 2023 Haw. App. LEXIS 13 (Haw. Ct. App. Jan. 23, 2023).     GEICO employed Stephen Roy as Managing Attorney for its litigation department. One of Roy's duties was to defend GEICO's insureds against lawsuits arising from motor vehicle accidents. Roy sued GEICO, alleging GEICO violated the Hawaii Whistle ..read more

    The court found that the insured's request for an appraisal was timely and ordered the insurer to participate. Cloisters of Naples, Inc v. Landmark Am. Ins. Co., 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 6884 (M.D. Flag. Jan. 13, 2023).     A hurricane damaged Cloisters, a condominium. Cloisters made a claim under its commercial insurance policy with Landmark. Landmark acknowledged coverage but failed to pay what Cloisters thought was needed. Cloisters sued.     The policy had a standard appraisal provision, but another clause had a suit litigation provision requiring a request f ..read more

    The court granted the insurer's motion to dismiss because, although there was coverage for the property under the mortgagee's policy, the home owner was not a named or additional insured under the policy. Cart v. Great Am. Assur. Co., 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 6207 (W.D. La. Jan. 12, 2023).      Plaintiffs' property was damage by Hurricanes Laura and Delta. Because Plaintiff failed to maintain homeowner's hazard insurance subject to the mortgage, Rushmore Management Services procured a force-placed lender policy on the property through Great American. Plaintiffs filed ..read more

    The court denied the insured's motion to dismiss after the insurer filed suit to compel an appraisal. Allied Trust Ins. Co. v. Tsang, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 352 (E.D. La. Jan. 3, 2023).      The insureds reported damage to their property arising from Hurricane Ida. The insurer, Allied Trust, investigated and determined that the covered damage was $1,978.18, which was less that the policy's deductible. The insureds estimated that the covered damage was $135,270.78.      Allied Trust invoked the appraisal provision. Allied Trust later filed suit allegin ..read more

   Our panel spoke at the ABA, Section of Litigation, Insurance Litigation Committee’s annual seminar today in Tucson. We addressed the impact of the Supreme Court’s overruling the Roe case in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization ..read more

    The California Court of Appeal reversed the trial court's grant of the insurer's demurrer on a COVID-19 claim and remanded the case for further proceedings. John's Grill v. Hartford Fin. Servs. Group, 2022 Cal. App. LEXIS 1056 (Cal. Ct. App. Dec. 27, 2022).      John's Grill had two insurers, Hartford and Sentinel. Hartford's motion to quash service of summons was granted by the trial court and affirmed by the appellate court. Sentinel's policy had customised trigger-of-coverage language that was virus-specific. The Sentinel endorsement (1) contained an affirmative ..read more

    After a jury awarded damages related to the insurer's delayed payment under the claim and the insurer's post trial motions to set aside the verdict were denied, the Tenth Circuit affirmed. US General, LLC v. GuideOne Mut. Ins. Co., 2022 U.S. App. LEXIS 34066 (10th Cir. Dec. 12, 2022).      Crossroads American Baptist Church submitted a claim to GuideOne for hailstorm damage. Crossroads hired US General as the general contractor to perform the repairs and later assigned its interest in the insurance policy to US General.     Numerous disputes arose between ..read more

    Given the opposing experts' contradictory reports, the court denied both the insured and insurer's motions for summary judgment regarding coverage for a pipe leak. Pronti v. Hanover Ins. Co., 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 222306 (W.D. N. Y. Dec. 9, 2022).     The insured had a swimming poll and spa, which functioned using a subsurface plumbing system, covered with concrete decking. A subsurface pipe began to leak, preventing the pool from properly functioning. The insureds gave notice under their homeowners' policy and contended that significant portions of the pool, spa, concr ..read more

    The Ninth Circuit certified a question to the California Supreme Court asking whether the presence of COVID-19 constitutes "direct physical loss to property.'" Another Planet Entertainment, LLC v. Vigilant Ins. Co., 2022 U.S. App. LEXIS 35763 (9th Cir. Dec. 28, 2022).      Another Planet was an event promoter and venue operator that owned event venues in California and Nevada. It held a commercial property policy with Vigilant Insurance Company. After the COVID-19 pandemic began in early 2020, government closure orders forced Another Planet to suspend its operation ..read more

    Conceding it was an unusual step, the federal district court ordered that limited discovery take place before ruling on the insurers' motions to dismiss the insureds' business interruption claims due to COVID-19. Philadelphia Eagles Limited Partnership v. Factory Mut. Ins. Co., 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 225729 (E.D. Pa. Dec. 15, 2022).      The Philadelphia Eagles submitted claims to its insurer, Factory Mutual Insurance Company, for large loss of of revenue due to COVID-19. Similarly, the Philadelphia 76ers submitted claims to Hartford Fire Insurance Company for losse ..read more