Insurance Coverage for Tort Claims

A press release yesterday brought news of an interesting next step in the process of increasing the intersections between law and molecular science. In short, liability insurance clients of Allianz will receive access to the ChemMeta analytic system developed by Praedicat. The ChemMeta system evaluates scientific literature regarding a selected set of chemicals that are

The discovery wars of tomorrow will include plaintiffs seeking access to existing and future analytic and predictive databases and models operated by insurers. Why? In part because the insurers are further ramping up the use of predictive analytics, according to a March 1, 2106 article in Carrier Management.  A key excerpt from its states:

Rutger’s strikes again as to insurance issues. Online promotion is here, and pasted below for the February 27th conference. Agenda here.

The conference is a great chance to learn about the law related to liability insurance. Even more specifically, attendees plainly will learn a great deal about how various actual and potential sections of

Fraud, fraud, fraud. Some days one would think the “f” word is the only word known to some in the insurance industry, and some of their friends. Certainly they’ve used the word a lot in demanding transparency in asbestos trust claiming related to torts. As to transparency in asbestos trust claiming, I whole heartedly agree

A new article from policyholder counsel at Neil Gerber  (Seth Lamden) “offers advice to independent defense counsel (often referred to as “Peppers counsel” in Illinois) on identifying and resolving some of the potential ethical and financial pitfalls that can arise when an insurer conditions payment of legal bills on the attorney’s compliance with billing guidelines.”

Rule 408 and analogous state law rules are intended to protect a good faith settlement offer from being used at trial to prove liability. See generally “Of “Purposes Not Prohibited”:  New Federal Rule of Evidence 408(B),  40 Creighton L. Rev. 679 (2007).  Insurers (and others), however, have perverted the principles of Rule 408 to

A July 25, 2014 post from The Northwest Policyholder provides good news for insureds, and potentially for defense counsel. The good news? The following quote provides just part of the good news – see the post for more specifics.

“First, the court held that AIG had opened the door to discovery of rates paid by

Developments continue for asbestos litigation – and insurance  coverage for asbestos claims. Warren Buffet’s companies already have been paid to take on an enormous share  of the US asbestos risk, including for London insurers and for domestic insurance companies such as CNA, and for AIG.   Buffet’s operations have  been subject to fierce criticism

The TortsProfBlog brings news that the Pennsylvania Supreme Court will decide if “bad faith” claims are assignable. More specifics are here, from DapperLaw. My purely personal view is that  holding the claims assignable would encourage a larger and more effective market in suing insurance companies when some (not all) of them too often fail