Case summariesInsurance Law, March 2009Summaries of the cases in this issue.
Insurers & the Troubled Asset Relief ProgramInsurance Law, March 2009On October 3, 2008, the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 (“EESA”) established the Troubled Asset Relief Program (“TARP”) in an effort to restore liquidity and stability to the U.S. financial system.
A life to die for: A case study on life insurance settlementsBy Stephen M. MargolinTrusts and Estates, March 2009A fictional story illustrating why life insurance policy issuers may wish to re-examine their negative outlook on the life insurance settlement business.
Scrivener be aware: Attention to detail is essential in vendor’s endorsementsBy Hon. James Fitzgerald Smith & Julia Illman ManessCivil Practice and Procedure, February 2009A recent opinion by the Illinois appellate court, First District, Fifth Division, reminds us that attention to detail when drafting a vendor’s endorsement in an insurance contract is of utmost importance.
Case names and holdingsInsurance Law, December 2008Where contractor was an additional insured under a subcontractor’s liability policy for “liability arising out of [the subcontractor’s] work” and a third party complaint alleged the subcontractor’s work to be negligent, the insurer had a duty to defend the contractor.
Case summariesInsurance Law, December 2008Holabird and Root (H & R) served as general contractor for the construction of the City of Chicago’s leased space in the Goldblatt building, owned by DePaul University.
Insurer must defend maker of lead paint-tainted toysBy Laura A. Foggan & Karalee C. MorellCorporate Law Departments, October 2008Last year’s massive series of recalls of children’s toys manufactured in China that contained lead paint spurred lawsuits seeking insurance coverage for losses arising out of the recalls.
Case names and holdingsInsurance Law, June 2008HOLDING: Insurer that sued two of its former agents for breach of contract and tortuous interference arising out of agents’ solicitation of former customers after termination of the agency using confidential information extracted from insurer’s computers, filed declaratory judgment action seeking to establish whether it had a duty to defend agent pursuant to personal and advertising injury coverage in a business owners liability policy.
Case summariesInsurance Law, June 2008HOLDING: Insurer that sued two of its former agents for breach of contract and tortuous interference arising out of agents’ solicitation of former customers after termination of the agency using confidential information extracted from insurer’s computers, filed declaratory judgment action seeking to establish whether it had a duty to defend agent pursuant to personal and advertising injury coverage in a business owners liability policy.
Legislative and regulatory updateInsurance Law, June 2008In January, the Illinois Department of Financial and Professional Regulation, Division of Insurance, notified all multi-peril crop insurance agents of increased efforts to eliminate rebating schemes by several entities involved in the sale of Federal Crop Insurance.
Protect yourself, protect your family with auto insurance coverageBy Stephanie K. NathansonWomen and the Law, June 2008Practically speaking, it is hard to find the time to stop and think about your automobile insurance coverage limits and how such limits can affect your life in the future.
Selected insurance legislation in the 95th General AssemblyInsurance Law, June 2008Construction Safety Act of 2008, aka, “Structural Work Act Reenactment.” Opposed by both the construction and insurance industries which have engaged a massive lobbying effort to kill it.
Insurance coverage for bankruptcy claimsBy Raymond T. Reott & Becky J. SchanzCommercial Banking, Collections, and Bankruptcy, April 2008When a company is in bankruptcy, the rules for pursuing environmental claims often drive governmental agencies and other parties to assert claims against the bankrupt entity.
Case names and holdingsInsurance Law, March 2008HOLDING: Insured failed to satisfy condition precedent to coverage by not giving immediate notice to insurer when insured knew of an occurrence which would cause it to incur costs likely to be paid by insurer.
Case summariesInsurance Law, March 2008Summaries of recent cases of interest to insurance law practitioners.
Case names and holdingsInsurance Law, December 2007Recent cases of interest, arranged alphabetically.
Case summariesInsurance Law, December 2007Recent cases of interest to insurance law practitioners.
Case names and holdingsInsurance Law, September 2007A list of the cases in this issue, arranged alphabetically.
Case summariesInsurance Law, September 2007Summaries of the cases in this issue.
Failure to insure contraceptives was not sex discriminationBy Michael R. LiedLabor and Employment Law, June 2007Union Pacific Railroad provided health care benefits to its employees who were covered by collective bargaining agreements. While the health plans provided benefits for services such as routine physical exams, they excluded coverage for a number of things. They excluded both male and female contraceptive methods, prescription and non- prescription, when used for the sole purpose of contraception. The health plans only covered contraception when medically necessary for a non-contraceptive purpose.
The Illinois Supreme Court holds that fax blasting may be potentially covered under a commercial liability policyInsurance Law, April 2007In Valley Forge Ins. Co. v. Swiderski Electronics, Inc., the Illinois Supreme Court held that allegations against an insured for unsolicited faxes potentially fell within the insured’s commercial general liability “advertising injury” coverage as a “publication,” and “material that violates a person’s right of privacy.”
Case names and holdingsInsurance Law, January 2007A listing of recent cases, arranged alphabetically.
Case summariesInsurance Law, January 2007Summaries of recent cases.
Insurance law updateBy Scott A. BlumenshineInsurance Law, January 2007A binding arbitration agreement between an injured uninsured motorist claimant and her insurer did not bar her subsequent lawsuit alleging the insurer’s unreasonable and vexatious delay in handling her claim.
