Danielle S. Ward | Balestreri Potocki & Holmes The Court of Appeal closed out 2019 by ruling that an additional insured can be bound to the arbitration clause in a policy when a coverage dispute arises between that additional insured and the carrier. (Philadelphia Indemnity Ins. Co. v. SMG Holdings, Inc. (2019) 44 Cal. App. 5th… Continue reading Prospective Additional Insureds may be Obligated to Arbitrate Coverage Disputes
Tag: Additional Insureds
The Consequences Of Not Giving Notice Of Disclaimer To Additional Insureds
Larry P. Schiffer | Squire Patton Boggs | July 31, 2019 Statutes and case law make it tough for insurance companies to disclaim coverage. In most jurisdictions, if an insurance company receives a claim or tender it must respond quickly and with specificity to avoid losing the right to assert an exclusion or other basis… Continue reading The Consequences Of Not Giving Notice Of Disclaimer To Additional Insureds
Florida Court of Appeals Creates Hurdles to Assignment of Benefits
Margo Meta | The Policyholder Report | October 5, 2018 Last month, the Florida Court of Appeals for the Fourth District weakened assignment-of-benefits claims after it held that an insurer may require all insureds and mortgagees to provide written consent prior to executing an assignment of benefits agreement. In Restoration 1 of Port St. Lucie v.… Continue reading Florida Court of Appeals Creates Hurdles to Assignment of Benefits
Oregon Supreme Court Reaffirms Broad Nature of the Duty to Defend, even in the Face of Ambiguous or Unclear Allegations
Kevin Mapes | The Policyholder Report | December 14, 2016 Back in August 2015, I wrote this post about the Oregon Court of Appeals opinion in West Hills Development Co. v. Chartis Claims, Inc., where the court confirmed that Oregon’s broad duty to defend extended to parties claiming rights as “additional insureds.” Last week, the… Continue reading Oregon Supreme Court Reaffirms Broad Nature of the Duty to Defend, even in the Face of Ambiguous or Unclear Allegations
Oregon’s Broad Duty to Defend Extends to “Additional Insureds”
Kevin Mapes | Ball Janik | August 19, 2015 On August 19, 2015, the Oregon Court of Appeals issued its opinion in West Hills Development Co. v. Chartis Claims, Inc., reaffirming the broad nature of an insurer’s duty to defend, even when that duty is owed to an “additional insured.” Contracting parties rely on indemnity… Continue reading Oregon’s Broad Duty to Defend Extends to “Additional Insureds”