SDV Insights

Formal investigations into the activities of corporations and their directors and officers remain increasingly hot topics in the news. While many of these investigations make headlines, whether or not a company might have coverage for fees incurred defending these investigations is seldom mentioned. Depending on the policy language, Director's and Officer's Liability ("D&O") may be a crucial risk management tool for companies faced with governmental investigations.

In Draggin' Y Cattle Co., Inc. v. Junkermier, et al. the Montana Supreme Court held that where an insurer defends its insured and the insured subsequently settles the claims without an insurer's participation, a court may approve the settlement as between the underlying plaintiff and underlying defendant, but the settlement will not be presumed reasonable as to the insurer.

When renting a car, consumers are faced with the dilemma of whether or not they should purchase a protection plan to cover any damage incurred while the car is in use. Before driving out and upon return, the rental company looks over the car carefully, taking note of any scratches, dings, and dents. Consumers often leave with many questions.

Recently, the 8th Circuit addressed allocation issues between covered and non-covered claims under a general liability policy. While allocation is a common issue raised by insurers, this case involved allocation raised by an excess carrier who did not participate in the defense of the underlying action.

It is not often that a case discussing the duty to cooperate comes along, although this is an important condition of coverage in virtually all insurance policies. The Ontario Court of Appeal decision in Ruddell v. Gore Mutual Insurance Company comes as helpful and reassuring guidance to policyholders on what the "duty to cooperate" language in their policy obligates them to do.

Zurich American Insurance Company ("Zurich") offers a proprietary "General Liability Supplemental Coverage Endorsement," form U-GL-1345-B-CW (04/13), which is used to modify and, in some cases, enhance coverage terms reflected in current ISO commercial general liability ("CGL") forms. However, form U-GL-1345-B-CW includes one change that can significantly impair risk transfer when used by a trade subcontractor who has promised additional insured ("AI") coverage to an upstream party.

The European Union's ("EU") General Data Protection Regulation ("GDPR") has been in effect for just over a year, and the full extent of the data privacy law's global impact is just now being fully realized.

International Risk Management Institute, Inc. recently published an article written by Greg Podolak, with the assistance of Celia Waters on Additional Insured Coverage and Auto Insurance. Auto insurance can play a vital role as an insurance recovery asset to an upstream party, therefore properly navigating coverage on a downstream party's auto policy is important.

The Travelers Indemnity Company ("Travelers") recently released a new proprietary commercial general liability ("CGL") form designated CG T1 00 02 19. The form is largely reflective of current ISO forms but includes one change that can significantly impact risk transfer when used by a trade contractor who has promised additional insured coverage to an upstream party.

Determining the scope of discovery can be challenging, particularly when an insurance bad faith claim is involved. Courts often face the difficult decision of weighing the importance of preserving attorney-client privilege with the public policy rationale of protecting an insured against their insurer's bad faith behavior. The Supreme Court of South Carolina recently recognized this dilemma by rejecting a hardline approach to bad faith discovery disputes and adopting a case-by-case analysis.