Search Results

The court ruled on whether there was any physical damage to the properties and if activities designed to prevent the transmission of the coronavirus were 'repairs'.

The insurance policy phrase "direct physical loss of or damage to" has been in the news the past few years thanks to BI cases stemming from the pandemic.

The opinion links two other recent Supreme Court decisions that have set precedent in resolving disputes over D&O insurance coverage, all clarifying the role Delaware laws play in those contracts.

The Fifth DCA reversed a punitive damage award a jury returned to petitioner Brinda Coates against respondent R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. that exceeded the net compensatory damage award by a ratio of 106.7:1.

The ruling is a win for insurance companies after the state appellate judges rejected a challenge to an auto insurer's "limit of protection" clause.

An ethics expert said the disbarment was a result of a "sheer number of violations that was too much" for the lawyer to overcome.

The court found that the COVID-19 government shutdown order does not constitute a 'direct physical loss.'

"In order to hold in the manner in which you're arguing we would have to read 'purchase' to mean any change in coverage," said Justice Christine Donohue, who sits on the Pennsylvania Supreme Court bench.