In an unpublished opinion, the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals reversed a South Carolina District Court judge’s finding that an insurer was equitably estopped from denying coverage to a new owner of the insured business for a wrongful death claim. First Financial Ins. Co. v. Brumbaugh, No. 12-2452, 2014 WL 57558 (4th Cir. Jan. 8,… Continue Reading
Insurance Law Blog
South Carolina Insurance Law Blog provides the latest legal updates in the field of insurance coverage and is maintained by the Collins & Lacy Insurance Practice Group.
Court Not Amused by Lawyers’ Appellate Brief
A medical equipment provider sued an insurer to recover assigned first-party no-fault benefits. The insurer appealed from an order denied its cross-motion for summary judgment. The order was essentially affirmed. However the court, on its own motion, ordered the plaintiff’s lawyers to show cause why they should not be sanctioned as a result of the… Continue Reading
S.C. Supreme Court Finds CGL Policy Excludes Coverage Where Subcontractor Damages Insured’s Completed Work
A Commercial General Liability (CGL) policy did not provide coverage when a brick face was damaged by improper cleaning after the insured completed its installation according to a recent opinion of the South Carolina Supreme Court. Finding exclusions j.(5) and n applied to remove coverage, the S.C. Supreme Court reversed the decision of the circuit… Continue Reading
Lawsuit Alleging Pharmaceutical Distributor’s Involvement in “Pill Mill” Activities Triggers GL Policy’s Defense Obligation
In Liberty Mutual Fire Insurance Company v. J M smith Corporation, No. 7:12-2824-TMC, 2013 WL 5372768 (D.S.C.), Liberty Mutual filed a declaratory judgment action against its insured in South Carolina Federal Court. The suit sought a finding that the State of West Virginia’s suit against J M Smith did not invoke the defense obligation of a… Continue Reading
4th Circuit Finds Retired Insured Is Not Entitled to Benefits Under Disability Policy
Retired Insured Was Not Regularly Engaged in Occupation for Gain or Profit A disability income policy does not provide benefits to someone already retired, according to a July 2013, unpublished opinion of the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals. Finding the policy definitions of “your regular occupation” and “total disability” were unambiguous, the Fourth Circuit affirmed… Continue Reading
Methamphetamines vs. Narcotics – The Sequel
S.C. Supreme Court Reverses S.C. Court of Appeals; Holds Methamphetamine Is Not a Narcotic Post by Logan Wells The plain and ordinary meaning of narcotic in an insurance policy does not include methamphetamine according to a June 12, 2013 opinion of the S.C. Supreme Court. Finding the use of the term “narcotic” created, at a… Continue Reading
Insurance Company Lacks Standing to Recover Gambling Losses
A title insurance company busted in its attempt to recover losses stemming from thefts to support a gambling problem inProctor v.Whitlark and Whitlark, Inc., App. Case No. 2012-205510, 2013 WL 2017335 (S.C. Ct. App. May 15, 2013). Post by Peter Dworjanyn Lauren Proctor gambled on video poker machines at the defendants’ restaurants from 1999 through… Continue Reading
S.C. Court of Appeals Finds D&O Endorsement Excludes Coverage for Defective Construction Claims
A D&O endorsement excluded coverage for claims alleging damage to other property as a result of defective design or construction. According to a May 8, 2013 opinion of the S.C. Court Post by Logan Wells of Appeals, coverage for allegations against the insured for breach of fiduciary duty, however, was not excluded. In Pulliam v.… Continue Reading
D&O Coverage Ends on Date of Insured’s Jury Conviction
The Fourth Circuit has affirmed a Virginia district court’s decision, finding the conviction of an insured in an underlying criminal case ended an insurer’s obligation to pay defense costs pursuant to a D&O policy. Farkas v. Nat’l Union Fire Ins. Co. of Pittsburgh, Pa, No. 12-1481 (4th Cir. Apr. 11, 2013) (unpublished). National Union provided… Continue Reading
S.C. Supreme Court Holds Limit of Liability Provision Is Neither Unconscionable nor Against Public Policy
Contractual limitation of a home inspector’s liability does not violate South Carolina public policy and, as a matter of law, is not unconscionable, according to a March 2013 opinion of the S.C. Supreme Court. Finding such limit of liability clauses are enforceable, the court specifically noted the lack of a requirement that home inspectors carry… Continue Reading
- « Previous Page
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- …
- 9
- Next Page »
