Towers Watson & Co. v. National Union Fire Insurance Company Pittsburgh, PA et al
Case Number:
1:20-cv-00810
Court:
Nature of Suit:
Judge:
Firms
- Arnold & Porter
- Cameron McEvoy
- Dykema
- Eccleston & Wolf
- O'Melveny & Myers
- Whiteford Taylor
- Wiley Rein
Companies
Sectors & Industries:
-
March 07, 2024
Towers Watson Insurers Off Hook For $90M Merger Coverage
Towers Watson's insurers do not need to cover settlements totaling $90 million in two shareholder suits stemming from the company's merger with Willis, a Virginia federal judge ruled, saying the transaction was barred by a so-called bump-up exclusion.
-
January 01, 2024
Top Specialty Lines Insurance Cases To Watch In 2024
The new year promises to bring major decisions from the U.S. Supreme Court down to the district court level on issues affecting key questions in specialty lines of insurance coverage. Here, Law360 looks at specialty lines cases to watch in the first half of 2024.
-
August 22, 2023
Towers Watson's Insurers Say No Coverage For Merger Suits
Following the Fourth Circuit's reversal of a decision forcing Towers Watson's insurers to cover settlements of shareholder suits stemming from the company's merger with Willis, the parties filed competing motions for summary judgment in Virginia federal court, with the insurers arguing that a so-called bump-up exclusion prevents coverage.
-
November 10, 2021
Willis Towers Watson, Insurers End Merger Settlement Dispute
Willis Towers Watson and its insurers agreed to end litigation over coverage for two settlements claiming Towers Watson's shareholders were underpaid during its merger with Willis, with the insurers reserving the right to appeal a holding that a "bump-up" exclusion doesn't apply to the settlements.
-
October 06, 2021
Insurers Must Cover Willis Towers Watson Merger Settlements
Towers Watson's insurers must cover the settlements in two proposed class actions claiming that its shareholders were underpaid during its merger with Willis, a Virginia federal court said, ruling that the insurers could not rely on a "bump-up" exclusion to escape coverage.