Tag Archives: Insurance Law

Commercial & Personal Auto: Vicarious Liability not Limited to Negligent Operation of Vehicle


By Greg Johnson. Every once in a while, while putting together a blog post on a particular issue, I run across a case that doesn’t fit into the post I am putting together, but is nonetheless interesting. Here’s an oldie, … Continue reading

Posted in BAP, Coverage, PAP | Tagged , , | 1 Comment

Commercial & Personal Auto: Permissive Use, Omnibus Coverage & Split Liability Limits


I often receive questions regarding the “rules” which apply to accidents involving rental vehicles, loaner vehicles, leased vehicles, demos, spot-delivered vehicles, etc.  I thought I’d take some time to update some of my seminar materials and provide an update.   … Continue reading

Posted in ADCF Policy, BAP, Coverage, PAP, Rentals | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Liability Insurance: The Risks of Denying a Duty to Defend


By Greg Johnson. Deciding whether to defend the insured in a third-party lawsuit (which generally involves a comparison between the allegations of the complaint and the policy), can be simple, complex or somewhere in between.  Regardless, insurers should always factor in the potential risks … Continue reading

Posted in ADCF Policy, Bad Faith, Coverage, Duty to Defend, Duty to Indemnify | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Reducing Defense Costs: “High-Low Coverage Agreements”


I was dusting off some old seminar materials and ran across an article I had written back in 1995 regarding the use of high-low coverage agreements.  In light of the economy and insurer’s efforts to save costs, the article is perhaps even … Continue reading

Posted in Auto Dealer, BAP, CGL, Coverage | Tagged , , , , | 1 Comment

Employee Dishonest Acts Not Covered by Fidelity Bond


A federal district court in Wisconsin recently ruled that losses a mortgage lender incurred as a result of having to repurchase loans that were issued through the dishonest acts of an employee and went into default were not covered by … Continue reading

Posted in ADCF Policy, Auto Dealer, Coverage, Dishonesty | Tagged , , , , , | 1 Comment

(Part VI) Minnesota CGL: Getting a Handle on Large Construction Defect Claims


This post is a continuation of the series “Minnesota CGL: Getting a Handle on Large Construction Defect Claims.” This post (Part VI) is the first of several posts which address additional insured (AI) coverage for a general contractor under the … Continue reading

Posted in CGL, Coverage | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | 4 Comments

(Introduction) Getting a Handle on Large Construction Defect Claims


Having studied, worked with and litigated coverage issues under the commercial general liability (CGL) policy for twenty years, large construction defect claims, particularly those involving commercial and multi-unit residential buildings, pose some of the most complex claims encountered by those … Continue reading

Posted in CGL, Coverage | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

(Part V) Minnesota CGL: Getting a Handle on Large Construction Defect Claims


This post is a continuation of the series “Minnesota CGL: Getting a Handle on Large Construction Defect Claims.” This post (Part V) addresses the obligation of a subcontractor and its commercial general liability (CGL) insurer with regard to the defense … Continue reading

Posted in BAP, CGL, Coverage | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 3 Comments

Minnesota CGL: Clean Up Costs Arising From Construction Operations Barred


In Engineering & Construction Innovations Inc. v. Western National Mutual Insurance Co., an unpublished decision of the Minnesota Court of Appeals released on August 18, 2010, the court held that clean up costs arising out of the insured’s operations at the … Continue reading

Posted in CGL, Coverage, Duty to Indemnify | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

(Part III) Minnesota CGL: Getting a Handle on Large Construction Defect Claims


This post is a continuation of the series “Minnesota CGL: Getting a Handle on Large Construction Defect Claims.” This post (Part III) addresses the “strict construction” test used to interpret indemnification agreements.  Part IV will address the specific requirements of “insured … Continue reading

Posted in CGL, Coverage | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment