Two recent court cases, a continent apart, may be the beginning of a trend on choice-of-law analysis. (Photo: Shutterstock)
Recently, California and Delaware courts have applied choice-of-law analyses to coverage disputes seemingly to avoid denials of coverage. In Pitzer College v. Indian Harbor Ins. Co., the California Supreme Court held a choice-of-law provision was potentially unenforceable because it violated "fundamental public policy." In Pfizer Inc. v. Arch Ins. Co. the Delaware Superior Court held Delaware law applied to insurance contracts that did not contain choice-of-law provisions, even though New York law arguably applied.
Want to continue reading?
Become a Free PropertyCasualty360 Digital Reader
Your access to unlimited PropertyCasualty360 content isn’t changing.
Once you are an ALM digital member, you’ll receive:
- All PropertyCasualty360.com news coverage, best practices, and in-depth analysis.
- Educational webcasts, resources from industry leaders, and informative newsletters.
- Other award-winning websites including BenefitsPRO.com and ThinkAdvisor.com.
Already have an account? Sign In
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
