No matter how the court rules, its decision in Great Lakes will have obvious consequences, the least of which is for parties to marine insurance contracts. A federal standard holding maritime choice-of-law provisions nearly always enforceable will mean insurers will have an easier time protecting themselves with favorable (or more developed) state law. Credit: Andy Konieczny/Adobe Stock No matter how the court rules, its decision in Great Lakes will have obvious consequences, the least of which is for parties to marine insurance contracts. A federal standard holding maritime choice-of-law provisions nearly always enforceable will mean insurers will have an easier time protecting themselves with favorable (or more developed) state law. Credit: Andy Konieczny/Adobe Stock

How should a federal court decide whether to enforce a choice-of-law provision? That's the question at the heart of Great Lakes Insurance v. Raiders Retreat Realty, a maritime coverage dispute that will be argued before the U.S. Supreme Court in October.

Want to continue reading?
Become a Free PropertyCasualty360 Digital Reader

  • 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.
NOT FOR REPRINT

© 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.

Litigation
E&S/Specialty
Property & Casualty