Applying California law, the Ninth Circuit held that an excess insurer may challenge the allocation of an underlying settlement that resolves both an underlying claim against an insured and the insured’s coverage dispute with the primary insurer. Scottsdale Ins. Co. v. Certain Underwriters at Lloyds., 2020 WL 7419261 (9th Cir. Dec. 18, 2020). The court further held that a primary insurer is not entitled to equitable contribution from an excess carrier if the excess carrier was not notified of the underlying claim until after the primary insurer denied coverage.
Latest Post
More Posts
Run-Off Endorsement Bars Coverage for “False Filings” Made in Connection with Construction Projects for State Agencies
Indemnification Demands Made by Stock Option Plan Trustee Not “Fiduciary Claims” for “Wrongful Acts”
Illinois Court of Appeals Rules Insurer Did Not Act in Bad Faith in Denying Coverage Where Claim Was Made Before Policy Period
Ninth Circuit Holds That Alleged Misappropriation of Client Funds Triggers E&O Coverage, But No Bad Faith Where Insurer’s Denial Was Reasonable
Alleged Violations of Fair Labor Standards Act and New York Labor Law Not “Wrongful Acts” Under Employment Practices Liability Policy
Claims Alleging Same Conduct Against Same Insured But Based on Different Specific Facts Not Related Under D&O Policy
Outside Business Exclusion Bars Coverage for Claims Indirectly Related to Outside Business
Assault and Battery Exclusion Bars Coverage for Negligence Action Arising from Stabbing at Concert
Breakaway Church Not an “Insured” Under Original Church’s D&O Policy
Subscribe: Subscribe via RSS
Blogs
Firm/Org