SDV Insights

Earlier this year, the 5th Circuit applied the Davis factors to determine the validity of an indemnity clause in a Master Services Contract. In Larry Doiron Inc. et al., v. Specialty Rental Tool & Supply LLP et al., the court affirmed the notion that if a contract provides services on navigable waters aboard a vessel, a maritime contract exists, even if the contract calls for incidental or insubstantial work unrelated to the use of a vessel.

The Eleventh Circuit recently affirmed that Nationwide acted in bad faith by refusing to settle a claim against its insured for the policy limits of $100,000, exposing the policyholder to a $5.83 million verdict.

On June 20, 2017, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court ruled that a life insurance salesman had no fiduciary duty to his customers where the customers retained decision-making authority regarding which policies to purchase.

In an action filed against Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E) in the Eastern District of California last month, Valero Refining Co. alleges it sustained damages in excess of $75 million, including costs to restore operations and lost profits from decreased output, as a result of a power outage to its Benecia, California refinery. See Valero Refining Co. -- California v. Pacific Gas & Electric Co., 2:17-cv-01359-TLN-EFB (E.D.Cal. June 30, 2017).

On June 15, 2017, Governor Rick Scott ratified H.B. 377, which amends Florida's statute of repose for construction defect claims to include, for the first time, a definition for contract completion.

Thousands of Connecticut homeowners have fallen victim to a defective concrete epidemic. Over the last thirty years, the foundation in many homes, particularly in the Northeast region of the state, was built with a concrete aggregate that contained the mineral pyrrhotite.

SDV Partner Gregory Podolak recently published “Additional Insured Coverage Under Excess Policies,” anot ...

In April, the Court of Appeals of Texas held that a party seeking additional insured coverage under an umbrella general liability policy issued by Lexington Insurance Company cannot reap the benefits of being an additional insured, and simultaneously avoid the limitations of an arbitration clause contained in the policy.

The Massachusetts Supreme Court has held that an insurer's duty to defend does not include a duty to prosecute or fund its insured's affirmative counterclaim against a third party under an employment practices liability insurance policy. The insured manufacturer in this case was sued for wrongful termination by a former employee whom the manufacturer accused of misappropriating company funds, and intended to pursue a counterclaim to recover the money.

The Rhode Island Supreme Court recently relied on an SDV amicus brief to decide a case favorable to policyholders. In Amberleigh Hudson v. GEICO Insurance Agency, 2017 WL 2622777 (R.I. June 16, 2017), the Court held that an automobile passenger was still "occupying" the vehicle for purposes of uninsured motorist coverage after exiting the vehicle to help an accident victim.