General Liability

Expert Analysis

• Regulatory Estoppel Does Not Invalidate The Virus Exclusion

  

  Some policyholders seeking coverage for losses stemming from COVID-19 are arguing that virus exclusions are invalid due to regulatory estoppel, but this theory lacks substance and threatens to undermine formal clarifications of insurance policy intent, say Jonathan Schwartz and Colin Willmott at Goldberg Segalla.

• Leaving The Tort System Behind Via Corporate Risk Transfer

  

  With an increasingly litigious tort environment for corporate defendants, companies holding legacy liabilities would do well to investigate a capital markets solution for transferring their risks, say Mark Hemmann at FARA LLC and Peter Kelso at Roux Associates.

• History Can Inform Pandemic Biz Interruption Insurance Cases

  

  Historical catastrophes like the SARS epidemic, the 9/11 terrorist attacks and asbestos exposure provide helpful context for understanding the scale of current insurance litigation stemming from coronavirus-related business interruption, say Anne Gron and Georgi Tsvetkov at AlixPartners.

• 'Notice Of Circumstances' May Preempt Virus Insurance Denial

  

  Insurance policyholders impacted by COVID-19 should consider proactively sending notices of circumstances to their insurers in order to preempt new pandemic policy exclusions, although this tactic carries certain risks as well, say Richard Milone and Jennifer Romeo at Milone Law Firm.

• How Law Firms Can Maximize COVID-19 Insurance Coverage

  

  Law firms struggling due to the pandemic should identify relevant insurance policies and provisions, be mindful of notice requirements that could interfere with coverage, and push back against policy exclusions, say Robin Cohen and James Smith at McKool Smith.

• Maximize Chances Of Insurance Coverage For COVID-19

  

  Policyholders suffering losses related to COVID-19 can take steps right now, such as documenting proof of loss and mitigation efforts, to preserve their chances of recovery under property or business interruption insurance policies, says Creighton Page at Foley Hoag.

• Does Property Insurance Cover COVID-19 Damage In Texas?

  

  Business interruption claims have led the news about COVID-19 insurance disputes, but ahead could be property claims made pursuant to homeowners' policies — another proposition with significant complexity, says Drew Jones at Thompson Coe.

• Excess Policy Win Gives Calif. Insureds Hope For The Future

  

  The California Supreme Court's decision in Montrose v. Los Angeles Superior Court gives insureds facing long-tail liabilities a valuable gift by adopting the theory of vertical exhaustion, but it also explicitly leaves a number of questions to be resolved in future decisions, says Michael Fehner at Irell & Manella.

• Pa. Ruling Doesn't Support COVID-19 Biz Interruption Claims

  

  A recent Law360 guest article argued that the Pennsylvania Supreme Court's decision in Friends of Devito v. Wolf provides a clear advantage to policyholders seeking business interruption coverage for COVID-19 losses, but the case is not even related to property damage, say Anthony Miscioscia and Timothy Carroll at White and Williams.

• Liability Insurance Outlook For Opioid Public Nuisance Claims

  

  As lawsuits against prescription opioid manufacturers are being narrowed to focus on public nuisance claims based on intentional business schemes, pharmaceutical companies may struggle to secure insurance coverage unless they can explain how these claims allege a fortuitous loss, say Patrick Bedell and Allyson Spacht at BatesCarey.

• Are Litigation Funding Documents Protected From Discovery?

  

  With law firms and their clients increasingly interested in exploring litigation funding during the current economic crisis, attorneys must be aware of the trends emerging in courts across the country regarding the discoverability of litigation funding materials, say attorneys at Jenner & Block and Longford Capital.

• 3 Insurance Principles Behind Calif. Excess Policy Ruling

  

  The California Supreme Court's recent decision in Montrose v. Los Angeles Superior Court, streamlining policyholders' ability to collect from multiple policies, is based on three state insurance principles specific to continuous injury, say attorneys at Reed Smith.

• Virus Coverage Prospects Are Bright For Ind. Policyholders

  

  Indiana’s strong history of rigorous protection for insureds and strict scrutiny of contract terms bodes well for policyholders seeking coverage for COVID-19-related losses, so they should not take denials at face value, say attorneys at Plews Shadley.