The court set out the rules concerning attorney-client privilege in the context of a coverage dispute. As a starting point, “there is a presumption of no attorney-client privilege relevant between the insured and the insurer in the claims adjusting process.”
The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court addressed the responsibilities of an insurer under a homeowners policy to an innocent insured homeowner when her fiancée — a coinsured who co-owned the home — intentionally set fire to the home.
On December 31, 2019, the First District Illinois Appellate Court issued a decision clarifying what does and does not constitute “property damage” caused by an “occurrence” in the construction defect context.
Exxon Mobil prevailed with a narrow victory, and the majority of issues concerning potential climate change liabilities have yet to be decided.
It has long been the rule in Pennsylvania that a mental or psychological injury generally does not constitute “bodily injury,” as defined in most standard insurance policies, unless that mental or psychological injury results from a physical injury.
Threats, Opportunities Presented by New Technology in the Insurance Industry