Photo of Alex Merritt

The U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, applying Pennsylvania law, has held that a former board member of a company is not entitled to coverage when the company was dismissed with prejudice from the underlying action. Palmer v. Twin City Fire Ins. Co., 2017 WL 5571051 (E.D. Pa. Nov. 20, 2017).

Continue Reading Former Director Not Covered for Wrongful Acts Committed in Uninsured Capacity

The United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio, applying Ohio law, has held that an insurer is not entitled to judgment on the pleadings regarding the application of a prior knowledge provision, notwithstanding the insureds’ entry into a tolling agreement and receipt of a federal agency’s notice of findings of statutory violations prior to policy inception.  Acosta v. Potts, 2017 WL 4418579 (S.D. Ohio Oct. 5, 2017).

Continue Reading Pre-Inception Tolling Agreement and Agency Notice of Potential Statutory Violations Insufficient for Judgment on the Pleadings on Prior Knowledge Provision

A federal district court, applying Texas law, has held that an insured is not entitled to coverage for subsequent related claims when the insured gave late notice of the first claim.  ADI Worldlink, LLC v. RSUI Indem. Co., 2017 WL 4112112 (E.D. Tex. Sept. 18, 2017).

Continue Reading No Coverage For Claims Interrelated with Prior Improperly-Noticed Claim

The Ninth Circuit, applying Alaska law, has held that coverage was not afforded under a company’s professional errors and omissions insurance policy for a claim made against the company during the policy period but not reported until the renewal policy period.  Alaska Interstate Constr., LLC v. Crum & Forster Specialty Ins. Co., 2017 WL 3601728 (9th Cir. Aug. 22, 2017).

Continue Reading Coverage Barred for Claim Made During Initial Policy Period and Reported in Renewal Period

An Illinois district court, applying Delaware law, has held that a specific litigation exclusion in a company’s directors and officers insurance policy bars coverage for a claim arising “at least in part” from the litigation referenced in the exclusion.  RSUI Indem. Co. v. Worldwide Wagering, Inc, 2017 WL 3023748 (N.D. Ill. Jul. 17, 2017).

Continue Reading Specific Litigation Exclusion Bars Coverage When Claim Arises “At Least in Part” From Excluded Litigation

The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, applying California law, has held that an insured v. insured exclusion in a bank’s insurance policy bars coverage for a claim brought by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) in its capacity as a receiver of the insured bank. Hawker v. Doak, 2017 WL 1147131 (9th Cir. Mar. 27, 2017).

Continue Reading Insured v. Insured Exclusion Bars Coverage When FDIC Acts as Receiver

The Supreme Court of Utah has affirmed summary judgment in favor of an insurer, holding that language regarding the scope of coverage under a real estate brokerage company’s insurance policy encompassed only services performed for compensation through a traditional real estate commission.  Compton v. Houston Cas. Co., 2017 WL 1101816 (Utah Mar. 23, 2017).

Continue Reading No Coverage Under E&O Policy for Real Estate Transaction Involving Payment of Undisclosed Fee

A Maryland intermediate appellate court has affirmed summary judgment in favor of an insurer, holding that a Prior Acts Exclusion applied to bar coverage for two antitrust lawsuits where the suits alleged that the insured conspired to raise prices beginning as early as 2002 and the Prior Acts Exclusion barred coverage for “Interrelated Wrongful Acts, committed, attempted, or allegedly committed or attempted in whole or in part prior to May 15, 2007.”  Cristal USA Inc. v. XL Specialty Ins. Co., 2017 WL 727795 (Md. Ct. Spec. App. Feb. 24, 2017).  The court also held that a coverage determination by the primary insurer does not bind an excess follow-form insurer, and that the excess insurer had no duty to defend the action.

Continue Reading Prior Acts Exclusion Bars Coverage for Suits Alleging Wrongful Conduct Spanning Prior Acts Date

The United States District Court for the Southern District of Indiana, applying Mississippi law, has held that a bankers’ professional liability insurance policy did not cover a class action suit against a bank alleging that it wrongfully maximized overdraft fees charged to its customers.  Bancorpsouth, Inc. v. Federal Ins. Co., 2017 WL 373300 (S.D. Ind. Jan. 26, 2017).  The court also dismissed the bad faith claim made against the insurer because of the absence of coverage in the first instance.

Continue Reading Bankers’ Professional Liability Policy Excludes Overdraft Fee Litigation From Coverage

The Court of Appeal of Louisiana, applying Louisiana law, has held that a class arbitration claim that was covered under an errors and omissions policy was not “related” under the policy’s related claim provision to two earlier contractual demands for indemnity and workers compensation first made prior to the policy period.  Williams v. SIF Consultants of Louisiana, Inc., 2016 WL 7475860 (La. Ct. App. Dec. 29, 2016).

Continue Reading Claims Not Related When Prior Demands Would Not Have Been Covered