Consistent with numerous other jurisdictions, the New Jersey Supreme Court has held that insurance anti-assignment clauses do not preclude policyholders from assigning claims after a loss. In Givaudan Fragrances Corp. v. Aetna Cas. & Sur. Co., the Court examined claims for the defense and indemnification of an environmental liability action. The plaintiff brought a declaratory judgment complaint against several insurers, contending that it was entitled to coverage as an affiliate of the named insured. While the declaratory judgment action was pending, the corporate successor-in-interest to the named insured executed an assignment of rights under the policy to the plaintiff. Citing
Read More
New Jersey Superior Court Finds for Defendants in Slip-and-Fall Case Brought by Trespasser
In Negron v. Warriner’s Construction Co., Inc., the Law Division of the Superior Court of Cumberland County, NJ granted summary judgment to three defendants in a case concerning a slip and fall in a bank parking lot. The plaintiff fell while using the parking lot as a shortcut while walking from a store to his apartment. The plaintiff claimed that he fell on ice that was covered by a light coating of snow that had fallen within 30 minutes of the accident. The motion for summary judgment was filed by three of the four defendants, including the landowner, possessor of
Read More
Florida Supreme Court Adopts Concurrent-Cause Doctrine
Resolving a split among lower-level appeals courts, the Florida Supreme Court has adopted the concurrent-cause doctrine, ruling that coverage exists under an all-risk property policy when multiple perils combined to create a loss and at least one of the perils is covered by the terms of the policy. Under the facts outlined in Sebo v. American Home Assurance Co., No. SC14-897 (Fla. Dec. 1, 2016), John Sebo purchased a Naples, Florida home in April 2005, when it was four years old. American Home Assurance Company AHAC) provided homeowners insurance as of the date of the purchase. The policy, which insured
Read More
New Jersey Federal Court Declines to Dismiss ERISA Action Against Health Insurance Claims Administrators
In HUMC Opco, LLC v. United Benefit Fund, the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey addressed motions to dismiss an ERISA action brought against a health insurer and insurance claims administrators. The action concerned medical bills in excess of $7 million, for medical care provided by a hospital over the course of nearly a year. According to the Complaint, the patient’s health insurer was obligated to pay over $789,000.00 for the medical care based upon the so-called “Medicare rate,” but instead paid less than $12,900.00. Following the patient’s death, his spouse assigned his right to benefits
Read More
New Jersey Appellate Division Affirms Defense Verdict in Slip-and-Fall Case
New Jersey Appellate Division Affirms Defense Verdict in Slip-and-Fall Case In Anderocci v. Coach, Inc., the New Jersey Superior Court, Appellate Division reviewed a trial court decision granting summary judgment to the defendants in a slip-and-fall case. The fall occurred in a retail store in a shopping mall. The plaintiff contended that the fall was caused by a slippery floor. The plaintiff supported her claim with an expert opinion concluding that the establishment’s wood floor became slippery due to the use of excessive water in cleaning it. In granting summary judgment for the defendants, the trial court determined that the
Read More
Clark & Fox Partner Michael Savett Quoted in Law360
https://www.law360.com/insurance/articles/860106/nj-justices-may-bolster-insurers-in-policy-assignment-feuds
Read More
New Jersey Appellate Court Rejects Premises Liability Claim When Plaintiff Was Aware of Risk
In Ilg v. Meade, the New Jersey Superior Court, Appellate Division addressed an action for injuries allegedly caused by a slip and fall on snow and ice while walking near the neighboring defendants’ home. Following a snowstorm, the defendants had parked their cars on their driveway in a manner that partially blocked the sidewalk in front of their residence. While walking to the defendants’ residence on the date of the accident, the plaintiff had walked from her driveway into the street to avoid the defendants’ vehicle. However, when returning to the residence later that day, the plaintiff walked from her
Read More
New York Court Enforces Policy’s Suit Limitation Clause
The Kings County Supreme Court enforced a 12-month suit limitation clause and dismissed a wind and hailstorm claim involving damage to two apartment complexes in Dallas, Texas. In doing so, the Court enforced well-established New York authority holding that policy provisions that modify the statute of limitations by mandating that suit be brought within 12-months of any loss are reasonable and enforceable. In Chandler Management Corp. Corp. v. First Specialty Insurance Corp., the insured sought recovery under its commercial property policy for wind and storm damage to the roofs of two Dallas apartment complexes damaged during a May 24, 2011
Read More
Colorado Supreme Court Holds That Violation of “No Voluntary Payments” Clause Precludes Coverage Regardless of Prejudice to Insurer
The Colorado Supreme Court held that a liability insurer has no obligation to indemnify a policyholder for a settlement made without the insurer’s consent and in violation of the policy’s “no voluntary payments” clause. In so doing, the Court rejected the argument that this clause is only enforceable if its violation resulted in prejudice to the insurer. In Travelers Prop. & Cas. Ins. Co. of Am. v. Stresscon, an insured subcontractor sought indemnification from its insurer for a claim made by a general contractor regarding a construction accident allegedly caused by a subcontractor of the insured. The subcontractor settled with
Read More
New York Trial Court Applies Flood Exclusion to Superstorm Sandy Business Interruption/Food Spoilage Claim
In Northern Spy Food Co., LLC v. Tower Nat’l Ins. Co., an insured restaurant challenged its insured’s denial of a business interruption/food spoilage claim with regard to a power outage occurring during Superstorm Sandy. In denying the claims, the insurer contended that the policy’s flood exclusion applied, as the power outage was caused by extensive flooding at a power station. In analyzing coverage, the Supreme Court of New York County noted that the business interruption policy language provided coverage for a suspension in operations resulting from a “direct physical loss” that is “caused by or result[ed] from a Covered Cause
Read More
