On a certified question from the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia, the Supreme Court of Georgia has held that the traditional rule of pro rata allocation of coverage applied when two policies’ “other insurance” provisions conflict, regardless of the fact that one of the coverages was from a state-regulated insurance program.  Nat’l Cas. Co. v. Ga. Sch. Bds. Ass’n-Risk Mgmt. Fund, 2018 WL 3850936 (Ga. Aug. 14, 2018).

Continue Reading

The United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, applying Georgia law, has held that mishandling of mail by an insured’s employee which led to noncompliance with a notice requirement in an insurance policy cannot, as a matter of law, excuse the noncompliance.  Johnson & Bryan, Inc. v. Utica Mut. Ins. Co., 2018 WL 3387525 (11th Cir. July 11, 2018).  In affirming the grant of the insurer’s motion to dismiss, the appeals court agreed that whether a delay was justified was not a question for a jury where the insured’s failure to meet the requirement resulted from its own negligence.

Continue Reading

The United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, applying Georgia law, has affirmed a district court’s ruling that a fraudulent scheme using telephones to exploit a computer coding vulnerability in the insured’s system that ultimately led to a loss was not covered under a computer fraud provision in a commercial crime policy.  Interactive Commc’ns Int’l v. Great Am. Ins. Co., 2018 WL 2149769 (11th Cir. May 10, 2018).  Unlike the district court, however, the appellate court held that the scheme involved the “use of a[] computer.”  A summary of the district court opinion can be found here.

Continue Reading

The United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia, applying Georgia law, has held that there is no coverage for multiple lawsuits under employment practices liability insurance policies where the insured failed to comply with the policies’ notice requirements.  Nat’l Cas. Co. v. Fulton Cnty., Ga., 2018 WL 1523089 (N.D. Ga. Mar. 28, 2018).

Continue Reading

A Georgia federal district court has held that a fraudulent scheme using telephones to exploit a computer coding vulnerability in the insured’s system that ultimately led to a loss was not covered under a computer fraud provision in a commercial crime policy.  Incomm Holdings, Inc. v. Great Am. Ins. Co., 2017 WL 1021749 (N.D. Ga. Mar. 16, 2017).

Continue Reading

Applying Georgia law, a federal district court has held that rescission of an insurance policy based on a material misrepresentation in the application voids all provisions of the policy, including the “innocent insured” provision, such that the insureds who had no knowledge of the fraud cannot rely on that provision to preserve coverage for themselves. ProAssurance Cas. Co. v. Smith, 2016 WL 4223666 (S.D. Ga. Aug. 9, 2016).
Continue Reading