Archive for October, 2011


Texas Appellate Court Says Protective Safeguards Endorsement Applies

Texas Appellate Court Says Protective Safeguards Endorsement Applies – This case involves a first-party property insurance coverage dispute arising from the denial of a claim of loss for a warehouse fire. The fire occurred after the issuance of a binder …

Continue Reading...

Touch It Once

Touch It Once! As insurance professionals, we never have enough time.  We know that time lost or wasted can never be recaptured.   We have all heard “the touch it

Sign here

Court Case: Minnesota Supreme Court States No Waiver By Ford

Minnesota Supreme Court states no waiver by Ford - The Workers’ Compensation Court of Appeals erred when it held that the employer’s failure to expressly reserve


Court Case: No Duty to Defend Under Homeowners Policy

Court holds that there is no duty to defend or indemnify under Homeowners Policy.  Court was asked to determine if insured’s alleged drunkenness may have rendered


Court Case: AES v. Steadfast

Virginia Supreme Court states that insurance companies do not have to defend utility companies accused of intentional wrongdoing in connection with climate change liability lawsuits. The


Developing Cyber Loss Exposures

Today, insurance agents, insurance brokers, risk managers, chief financial officers, and chief information officers are facing new threats created by the need for speed. It has


Homeowners v. Harbor Walk Development

Federal Court rules that claims arising from the incorporation of Chinese drywall into homeowners’ residences are not covered by the contractor’s liability policies because they are subject to


September Market Barometer

MarketScout Market Barometer:  SOFT MARKET DRAWING TO A CLOSE  9/30/2011 Soft Market Drawing to a Close - Property & Casualty rate reductions coming to an end according to data


Barbee v. Nationwide Mut. Ins. Co.

Ohio Supreme Court upholds a three-year time limitation (from the date of the accident) for filing suit under a policy providing underinsured motorist coverage, even where


E. T. Limited, Inc. v. Essex Ins. Co

Court concluded that insurance company owed no duty to defend under the CGL Policy because the named insured’s issuance of a credit card receipt does not

All Rights Reserved. | The National Alliance for Insurance Education & Research