Recent Posts
Follow Us
twittergoogle_pluslinkedinrssyoutube
The Legal Stuff
BT Policyholder Protection Blog
0 0

18 Oct 2018 Does Insurance Cover California Employers for Intentional Acts of Employee Violence?

For reasons unknown, your employee has attacked a customer with a weapon, causing grievous bodily injury. Now, you as the employer have been sued in a personal injury lawsuit. The theory is that you negligently hired a dangerous person and your failure to adequately supervise the employee allowed him or her to commit battery against a customer.   Will your commercial general liability insurance—which generally provides coverage for bodily injury claims—offer coverage to you as the employer in this situation?   Under California law, the answer depends on the specific language of exclusions your policy may contain. The California Supreme Court recently held that employers are entitled to commercial general liability coverage for allegations that they negligently failed to supervise employees who have engaged in…

READ MORE
0 0

07 Feb 2017 California Supreme Court Denies Insurance Industry’s Attempt to Deregulate Insurance in California

  On January 23, in Association of California Insurance Companies v. Dave Jones, the California Supreme Court rejected carriers’ attempt to deregulate the insurance industry in the state by stripping from the insurance commissioner much of the broad power to supervise insurer conduct. This case is a big win for policyholders.   The issue before the court was whether the California Department of Insurance can regulate the representations insurers make to their customers about the cost to replace a policyholder’s home. In 2010, the insurance commissioner promulgated a regulation — C.C.R. sec. 2695.183 — governing what an insurance underwriter must do in setting the replacement cost of a home when selling homeowners coverage. This was expressed as a series of tasks the carrier must perform…

READ MORE
0 0

30 Sep 2016 California Court of Appeal Determines that Excess Insurer May Sue Primary Insurer for Unreasonable Refusal to Settle

  Insureds often have excess liability insurance policies to cover losses that exceed the limits of underlying primary insurance policies. Issues often arise, however, where a primary insurer refuses to settle a case within the limits of the primary policy, thereby implicating the excess policy.   In Ace American Insurance Company v. Fireman’s Fund Insurance Company, the 2nd District of the California Court of Appeal addressed the issue of whether an excess insurer could pursue a primary insurer that initially refused to settle a case within the limits of the primary policy where the underlying case was resolved by settlement in excess of the primary policy limits as opposed to a judgment.  This led to a situation in which the settlement demand increased above the…

READ MORE