SafetyLitigation.com
content top

Failure To Amend Insurance Coverage Disclosures Found Sanctionable

On Friday, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin granted a motion for sanctions against attorneys representing the manufacturer of a catwalk from which an egg farm worker fell and was seriously injured.  At the beginning of the case, the attorneys made the following initial disclosure about available insurance coverage from the company’s German insurer:...

Primary Insurer Wins Reinsurance Dispute Over Large Asbestos Settlement

Yesterday, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of New York granted summary judgment to the primary insurer of a pump manufacturer in a dispute with the primary insurer’s reinsurer.  Beginning in 1997, more than 140,000 claims were filed against the pump manufacturer alleging asbestos-related bodily injuries.  In two separate cases, one in California and one in New...

Fifth Circuit Finds Two “Occurrences” In Rejecting Rig Owner’s Insurance Claim

On Tuesday, the Fifth Circuit affirmed a judgment for the insurers of a drilling rig that rejected a claim from the rig owner for approximately $17 million in losses.  Following a storm in February 2010, a jack-up drilling rig encountered severe weather and the rough seas caused the rig’s legs to become misaligned, which added to the rig’s difficulties caused by twenty...

2015 Year in Review

Earlier today, we released the 2015 Year in Review, which assembles the 20 posts from last year that received the most reader interest.

District Judge Tosses Contribution/Indemnity Claim Where Not Supported With Specific Facts

In a subrogation action brought by an insurer following a boiler explosion in a medical facility, Defendant A cross-claimed against Defendant B alleging contribution or indemnity.  The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia granted Defendant B‘s motion to dismiss the cross-claim based on Rule 12(b)(6) where the cross-claim merely stated that 1) Defendant B...

Tenth Circuit Affirms That Primary Insurer’s Insolvency Did Not Trigger Excess Insurer’s Obligation

An Oklahoma corporation distributed a drilling mud viscofier containing asbestos to the oilfield between 1966 and 1985.  Thereafter, the corporation faced multiple personal injury suits based on asbestos exposure.  Its primary insurer from 1975 to 1984, however, was declared insolvent by a New Hampshire court in 2003 before the insurer had paid out any claims for bodily injury on the...

« Older Entries