The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit recently held that the failure to present the issuer of a letter of credit with draw request before the appointment of a conservator does not necessarily preclude recovery of damages by the beneficiary.
Posts tagged as “insurance law”
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit recently reversed the dismissal of a homeowner’s claims against her hazard insurer related to its deduction for costs of labor as “depreciation” in determining its net payment for damage to the home.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit recently reversed a trial court’s certification of an injunction class, holding that the injunctive relief sought by the class was improper because the true relief sought was really damages. A copy of the opinion in AA Suncoast Chiropractic Clinic, P.A. v. Progressive American Insurance Co. is available at: Link to Opinion. In 2012, Florida’s law requiring automobile insurance policies to provide personal injury protection (“PIP”) benefits up to $10,000 was amended so that “not every injured motorist will be eligible to access all $10,000 in benefits.” Coverage is capped at $2,500…
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit recently held that a borrower’s claims concerning lender-placed insurance practices were barred by res judicata, because the alleged practices were the subject of a class action suit in which the borrower was a class member who was provided notice of the settlement and did not object to the settlement. However, the Eighth Circuit also concluded that the servicer failed to establish that the statute of frauds barred the borrower’s claims concerning an alleged contract for interest rate reduction. A copy of the opinion in Calon v. Bank of America, NA is…
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit recently affirmed a trial court’s order certifying a class of Arkansas homeowners against an insurer that improperly withheld amounts for labor depreciation when paying covered property damage claims under their insurance policies. A copy of the opinion in Stuart v. State Farm Fire and Casualty Company is available at: Link to Opinion. A putative class of Arkansas homeowners (“insureds”) sued their insurer alleging that between Nov. 21, 2008 and Dec. 6, 2013 the insurer improperly withheld labor depreciation costs when paying insureds for covered property damage under their insurance policies. The insureds…
Reversing the rulings of the trial court and intermediate appellate court, the Supreme Court of Wisconsin recently concluded that a fire which spread across several properties was a single ‘occurrence’ for purposes of the commercial general liability policy, and not a new ‘occurrence’ each time the fire crossed a property line. By determining that the fire was a single ‘occurrence’ under the policy, the policy’s reduced per-occurrence limit for property damage “due to fire, arising from logging or lumbering operations” under its incorporated endorsement, rather than its higher aggregate limit, applied. A copy of the opinion in Ecura Insurance v. Lyme…
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit recently affirmed the dismissal of consolidated putative class action cases against mortgage loan servicers and an insurance company, holding that the filed-rate doctrine barred the plaintiffs’ claims. A copy of the opinion in Pankaj Patel, et al v. Specialized Loan Servicing, LLC, et al is available at: Link to Opinion. The plaintiffs in the two trial court cases, consolidated on appeal, alleged that their mortgage loan servicers breached the loan documents and the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing by supposedly overcharging for “force-placed” insurance (FPI) when the borrowers failed…
In a case involving a claim on a fire insurance policy relating to damaged real estate, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit recently held that the insurance policy’s two-year limitations provision did not apply to a claim brought under section 500.2006(4) of Michigan Complied Laws because it was not a claim “under the policy,” and instead Michigan’s “catch-all” six-year period of limitations applied. In addition, and contrary to two previous unpublished rulings, the Sixth Circuit determined that a private cause of action exists under section 500.2006(4) Accordingly, the Sixth Circuit determined that the insured’s claim was timely,…
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit recently affirmed the dismissal of a bank’s lawsuit against its insurer for breach of contract and bad faith denial of coverage, holding that the insurance policy’s exclusion for any claim based upon or arising from fees or charges applied to the facts alleged. The bank argued that the primary sources of the claims against it concerned the bank’s policies and procedures, which were not the subject of a policy exclusion. However, the Court held the insurer was not required to defend or indemnify the bank for the underlying $24 million settlement…
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit recently held that a liability insurance policy that broadly excluded coverage for invasion of privacy claims also excluded coverage for claims for violations of the federal Telephone Consumer Protection Act. A copy of the opinion in L.A. Lakers v. Federal Ins. Co. is available at: Link to Opinion. In 2012, a class action complaint was filed against the Los Angeles Lakers for allegedly sending text messages using an automatic telephone dialing system in violation of the TCPA, 47 U.S.C. § 227, et seq. The Lakers asked their insurer to defend them against…
The U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois recently held that a title insurer may exclude coverage under the exception for defects “created, suffered, assumed, or agreed to by the insured claimant” without intentional or wrongful conduct by the insured. In so ruling, the Court also held that the Illinois statute for bad faith denial of coverage by insurers did not apply to title insurers. A copy of the opinion in Bank of America, NA v. Chicago Title Insurance Company is available at: Link to Opinion. In 2007, a developer sought to purchase real estate in Yorkville, Illinois, to…
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit recently held that a businessowners insurance policy did not cover a class action judgment that arose out of unsolicited advertisement communications in violation of the federal Telephone Consumer Protection Act. A copy of the opinion in Auto-Owners Insurance Company v. Stevens & Ricci Inc. is available at: Link to Opinion. A business was solicited by an advertiser who claimed to have a fax advertising program that complied with the TCPA, 47 U.S.C. § 227. The business allowed the advertiser to fax thousands of advertisements to potential customers on its behalf. Six years later, a…