SDV Insights

In the matter of Remprex, LLC v. Certain Underwriters at Lloyd's London, policyholder Remprex was thrust into two separate class actions, both involving alleged violations of the Biometric Information Privacy Act ("BIPA").

It is rare for the U.S. Supreme Court to grant certiorari in cases involving issues of insurance. However, the Court's decision to grant certiorari in Great Lakes Insurance SE v. Raiders Retreat Realty Co., LLC, 143 S. Ct. 999 (2023), may substantially alter the use of choice-of-law provisions in maritime insurance policies, and possibly, insurance policies in general.

The Southern District of New York recently ordered a directors and officers ("D&O") liability insurer to pay up to $4.5 million to reimburse an insured investment firm for the costs the firm incurred defending an arbitration proceeding brought by a former executive.

Nevada's legislature recently passed a groundbreaking law imposing two prohibitions on insurers. First, the law prohibits insurers from issuing or renewing any liability insurance policy with an "eroding limits" provision.

A recent decision by the United States District Court for the District of Connecticut further confirms that Connecticut courts follow the majority rule that contractual anti-assignment clauses do not bar assignment of an insured's claim after the loss occurred.

Although collateral agreements provide security for insurers on policies with large deductibles, they can create hardships for insureds that are out of proportion with the insurers' security concerns.

Since the advent of the modern Insurance Services Office, Inc. (ISO), standard additional insured (AI) endorsement in the early 2000s, many insurance companies have advocated for an exceedingly narrow application, arguing that coverage is available only for the AI's vicarious liability for the named insured's acts or omissions.

The California federal district court case of KB Home v. Illinois Union Insurance Co., No. 8:20-cv-00278-JLS-JDE, (C.D. Cal. August 23, 2022), provides much needed guidance for cases involving builder's risk insurance claims for soft cost coverage.

The Supreme Court of Ohio recently ruled that a ransomware attack on a medical billing company failed to cause direct physical damage to the company's computer software as required under its business owners policy. Prior to this ruling, a ransomware attack on a business computer system and resultant claim under an all-risk commercial property insurance policy had not been addressed in Ohio.