About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

Case Citations [1] (July 2020 - April 2021)

handle is hein.ali/aliliabil9928 and id is 1 raw text is: LIABILITY INSURANCE CHAPTER 2. MANAGEMENT OF POTENTIALLY INSURED LIABILITY CLAIMS TOPIC 1. DEFENSE § 12. Liability of Insurer for Conduct of Defense C.A.10, 2020. Cit. in sup.; subsecs. (1) and (2) and com. (d) quot. in sup. Widower of motorist killed in a crash entered into a pretrial agreement with driver, parents of driver, and employer of driver, under which driver, parents, and employer assigned widower the policy limits of their insurance policies and their right to pursue claims against their insurer arising from their assigned attorney's failure to disclose the existence of their excess coverage insurance. Insurer brought a declaratory-judgment action against widower, alleging that widower was not entitled to damages beyond the policy limit, because the conduct of the attorney it assigned to defend the defendants in the preceding litigation did not show that it breached its duty to hire competent counsel. The district court granted insurer's motion for summary judgment. This court affirmed, holding that insurer did not breach its duty to hire competent counsel and was not vicariously liable for any negligence by the attorney. Relying on Restatement of Liability Insurance § 12, the court reasoned that insurer was not unreasonable in selecting the attorney, liability was generally not imposed upon a defendant for the professional malpractice of its chosen counsel, and widower failed to demonstrate how insurer directed the attorney's conduct in a manner that deprived the attorney of independent professional judgment. Progressive Northwestern Insurance Company v. Gant, 957 F.3d 1144, 1152, 1153, 1155, 1156. CHAPTER 3. GENERAL PRINCIPLES REGARDING THE RISKS INSURED TOPIC 1. EXCLUSIONS § 32. Exclusions D.N.M.2020. Subsecs. (1) and (5) quot. in sup. Insurer that had issued a professional-liability-insurance policy to nonprofit provider of trustee services for disabled individuals sued insured after its CEO pleaded guilty to embezzlement, seeking rescission of the policy, as well as a declaration that it had no duty to defend or indemnify insured against claims arising from CEO's actions, on the ground that CEO made material misrepresentations in insured's policy application. This court denied insurer's motion for summary judgment, but rejected insured's argument that insurer had the burden to prove that insured knew of CEO's embezzlement in order to establish a lack of coverage. The court held that the prior- knowledge provision contained in the policy created a condition precedent to coverage under Restatement of Liability Insurance § 34, rather than an exclusion under § 32, such that insured had the burden to show that it had no knowledge of circumstances that were likely to lead to a claim in order to be entitled to coverage. Evanston Insurance Company v. Desert State Life Management, 434 F.Supp.3d 1051, 1098, 1103. COPYRIGHT ©2021 By THE AMERICAN LAW INSTITUTE All rights reserved Printed in the United States of America For earlier citations, see the Appendices, Supplements, or Pocket Parts, if any, that correspond to the subject matter under examination.

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most