Winder Laboratories and Steven Pressman were insured by Continental Casualty Company and Valley Forge Insurance Company when Winder and Pressman were sued by Concordia Pharmaceuticals Inc. for allegedly “falsely or misleadingly advertis[ing] their [products] . . . as generic equivalents to Concordia’s product.” The insureds sought coverage under the insurers’ policies, both of which included…
Category: Insurance
Divided Panel Holds that Insurer’s Total-Loss Settlement Complied with Florida Law
After Gina Signor’s Lexus was damaged in an accident Safeco declared the vehicle a total loss under her automobile insurance policy. Under the policy, Signor was due the “actual cash value,” or “ACV,” of the vehicle. To determine the ACV, Safeco used the Certified Collateral Corporation ONE Market Valuation System, also known as the “CCC…
Language of Insurance Policy Governs Even When Flatly Contradicted by Clear and Overwhelming Proof of the Parties’ Intent
It is a truth universally acknowledged (by judges and lawyers, anyway), that unambiguous contract language must be interpreted according to its plain terms, without resort to extrinsic evidence. But what if that extrinsic evidence shows, without dispute, that both parties meant something else entirely? That court answered that question in Shiloh Christian Center v. Aspen…
Motorized Scooter Was an “Uninsured Motor Vehicle” Sufficient to Trigger UM Coverage
A Razor Pocket Mod scooter that struck a vehicle insured under a State Farm automobile insurance policy was an “uninsured motor vehicle” sufficient to trigger the policy’s Uninsured Motor Vehicle (“UM”) coverage. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Spangler, 64 F.4th 1173 (11th Cir. April 3, 2023). After Anna Spangler suffered injuries as a…
What Is an Illegal Human Life Wagering Contract?
According to the Eleventh Circuit, that life insurance policy you took out on your own life with the intent to sell it to a stranger may not in fact be void as an illegal wagering contract. In Jackson National Life Insurance Co. v. Crum, 54 F.4th 1312 (11th Cir. 2022), the Eleventh Circuit adopted the…
No “Follow-the-Fortunes” Doctrine Where a Reinsurance Agreement’s Terms Are Plainly Inconsistent with the Doctrine
The Eleventh Circuit in Public Risk Management of Florida v. Munich Reinsurance America, Inc., 38 F.4th 1298 (11th Cir. June 29, 2022), held that courts cannot infer application of the “follow-the fortunes” doctrine where a reinsurance agreement’s plain and unambiguous language is inconsistent with the doctrine. Public Risk Management of Florida (“PRM”), a self-insured intergovernmental…
Court Denies Coverage in Another Covid-19 Case, This Time Under Georgia Law
Recognizing that every federal and state appellate court has held that the presence of Covid-19 does not cause direct physical harm to a business’s property, the Eleventh Circuit has held again—this time under Georgia law—that Covid-related expenses and losses are not covered by a business insurance policy. In Henry’s Louisiana Grill, Inc. v. Allied Insurance…
All-Risk Insurance Coverage Doesn’t Cover All Risks from COVID-19
The Eleventh Circuit has answered an important and timely question about insurance coverage for business losses due to COVID-19. Under Florida law, an “all-risk” insurance policy covering direct physical loss or damage does not insure against losses and expenses incurred by businesses as a result of COVID-19. In SA Palm Beach, LLC v. Certain Underwriters…
Interlocutory Appeal Properly Taken from Declaratory Judgment on Insurer’s Duty to Defend; Ambiguous Exclusion Construed in Favor of Coverage
When a liability insurer seeks a declaratory judgment on whether it has a duty to defend and indemnify an insured, and the district court enters an order finding a duty to defend but putting off a decision on the duty to indemnify, is that nonfinal order subject to interlocutory appeal? In James River Insurance Co….
No Direct Physical Loss or Damage, No Coverage: All-Risk Policy Does Not Cover Lost Profits Due to COVID-19 Government Restrictions
The Eleventh Circuit held that an insured’s policy did not cover the lost profits it suffered as a result of government restrictions implemented in response to the COVID-19 pandemic because the policy only covered “direct physical loss or damage.” Ascent Hospitality Management Co. v. Employers Insurance Co. of Wasau, 2022 U.S. App. LEXIS 1161 (11th…