Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
In a case of first impression, New Jersey's Appellate Division recently explored the relationship between three clauses commonly contained in policies issued to professionals, in this case a professional engineering firm: 1) the exclusion for professional services contained in a commercial general liability ('CGL') policy, 2) the affirmative grant of products-completed operations coverage in that same CGL policy, and 3) the corresponding exclusion of products-completed operations coverage in an architect/engineer's professional indemnity policy. See S.T. Hudson Engineers, Inc. et al. v. Pennsylvania National Mutual Casualty Company, 388 N.J. Super. 592, 909 A.2d 1156 (App. Div. 2006), certif. denied, 189 N.J. 647, 917 A.2d 787 (2007).
In the context of determining whether the CGL policy triggered a duty to defend, the court held that while there were numerous professional negligence claims stated that would not have triggered the duty to defend, the underlying litigation also stated a claim for failure to warn and misrepresentation regarding a known danger. These claims, the court held, 1) clearly fell under the coverage afforded by the CGL policy's products-completed operations clause; 2) were not excluded by the professional services exclusion in that policy, and, indeed 3) would not have been excluded by the professional services exclusion even absent the products-completed operations clause. Finally, the court held that any other interpretation of the CGL policy would not meet the policyholder's reasonable expectation of coverage for this class of liability.
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.
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.
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.
The parameters set forth in the DOJ's memorandum have implications not only for the government's evaluation of compliance programs in the context of criminal charging decisions, but also for how defense counsel structure their conference-room advocacy seeking declinations or lesser sanctions in both criminal and civil investigations.