SDV Insights

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.

A recent Illinois Appellate Court’s decision in, Acuity Ins. Co. v. 950 West Huron Condominium Owners Association, 2019 IL App (1st) 180743 (2019), strengthens Illinois’ pre ...

In honor of Shark Week, that annual television-event where we eagerly flip on the Discovery Channel to get our fix of these magnificent (and terrifying!) creatures, I was inspired to write about ...

Policyholders in Puerto Rico should be aware of significant benefits provided by recent amendments to the Insurance Code. New rules establish an expedited method of property insurance dispute re ...