Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Documentation Requirements: No Right for Excess Carriers to Second-Guess Primary Carriers' Settlement Payments
Since 2001, numerous insurance companies have sought to impose on asbestos liability claims so-called “Documentation Requirements” (“DRs”), seeking to limit coverage provided by its policies to those claims that meet certain criteria. Those insurance companies assert that the DRs are necessary to counter the growing number of unsubstantiated asbestos-related bodily injury claims brought against policyholders. Generally, the DRs require a policyholder to provide medical documentation and data to show each asbestos injury for each claimant, as well as provide product identification and exposure history. See Scott Moser, Mealey's Seminar, 16 Mealey's Litig. Rep. 12 (Dec. 11, 2001) (an attorney for Equitas speaking about the documentation requirements). The policyholders, on the other hand, see the DRs as unreasonable conditions to coverage that are not found anywhere in the policy language. They argue that in many cases it may be reasonable for them or for their primary carriers to settle or to have settled claims for which there is not yet fully developed information, to avoid, inter alia, increased defense costs and the possibility of a much higher judgment if the information developed is unfavorable.
Application of the DRs to claims that fall within the layer of the insurance company that is putting them forth is questionable, particularly where the insurance company is denying coverage on other grounds. Numerous courts have held that a policyholder in such a situation who settles in the face of a reasonable anticipation that the underlying claimant may be successful is not required to prove the underlying liability case against itself in order to receive coverage. See e.g., Uniroyal, Inc. v. Home Ins. Co., 707 F. Supp. 1368, 1378-79 (E.D.N.Y. 1988); U.S. Gypsum Co. v. Admiral Ins. Co., 643 N.E.2d 1226, 1244 (Ill. App. 1995); Luria Bros. v. Alliance Assurance Co., 780 F.2d 1082, 1091 (2d Cir. 1986).
The DOJ's Corporate Enforcement Policy: One Year Later
The DOJ's Criminal Division issued three declinations since the issuance of the revised CEP a year ago. Review of these cases gives insight into DOJ's implementation of the new policy in practice.
Use of Deferred Prosecution Agreements In White Collar Investigations
This article discusses the practical and policy reasons for the use of DPAs and NPAs in white-collar criminal investigations, and considers the NDAA's new reporting provision and its relationship with other efforts to enhance transparency in DOJ decision-making.
How AI Has Affected PR
When we consider how the use of AI affects legal PR and communications, we have to look at it as an industrywide global phenomenon. A recent online conference provided an overview of the latest AI trends in public relations, and specifically, the impact of AI on communications. Here are some of the key points and takeaways from several of the speakers, who provided current best practices, tips, concerns and case studies.
New York's Latest Cybersecurity Commitment
On Aug. 9, 2023, Gov. Kathy Hochul introduced New York's inaugural comprehensive cybersecurity strategy. In sum, the plan aims to update government networks, bolster county-level digital defenses, and regulate critical infrastructure.