Environmental Claims, CGL Policies and Bankruptcy
September 09, 2004
A Policyholder/Debtor with Comprehensive General Liability ("CGL") insurance has a strategic decision to make: Should the Policyholder/ Debtor protect and preserve its insurance for post-bankruptcy claims, or seek to maximize the insurance proceeds available to satisfy third-party claims? Although the Policyholder/Debtor cannot dictate how its policies are treated during the bankruptcy proceeding, without determining a strategy the Policyholder/Debtor cannot hope to influence the outcome. This article addresses the situation where a Chapter 11 Policyholder/Debtor faces third-party environmental claims. Although this area of law is still developing and varies from one jurisdiction to another, the Policyholder/Debtor should consider certain key issues when determining its strategy for dealing with its CGL insurers.
You Said You'd Pay: The Myth of Pre-Tender Defense Costs
September 09, 2004
Insurance companies have increasingly seized upon the argument that they are not liable, under occurrence-based general liability insurance policies ("CGL policies"), for defense costs incurred before a policyholder has notified the insurance company of a claim or suit. They contend that policyholders are not entitled to these "pre-tender" defense costs primarily for two reasons. First, insurance companies assume that their duty to defend does not arise until they are provided with notice, and therefore, they have no obligation to pay defense costs incurred prior to that notice. Second, insurance companies categorize pre-tender defense costs as voluntary payments for which they are not responsible since they did not consent to such costs. Based on the commercial purpose of CGL policies, the language in the policies and established case law on notice and prejudice, policyholders can successfully argue that insurance companies are responsible for reimbursement of pre-tender defense costs.
Dangers of Waiver-of-Defense Clauses in Leases
September 09, 2004
A lessee entering into a new lease agreement must be mindful of a waiver-of-defense clause. If a lease agreement contains a waiver-of-defense clause and the lease is later sold or assigned, the purchaser or assignee, if it is a holder in due course, will take the lease free and clear of numerous defenses (including a fraud in the inducement defense) otherwise available to the lessee had the lease not been sold or assigned.
In The Marketplace
September 09, 2004
Highlights of the latest equipment leasing news from around the country.
Come 'Hell or High Water,' the Lessee Must Pay: Federal Court Upholds Defense Waiver
September 09, 2004
Come hell or high water" has been a motto of movie tough guys since the genre was invented. But as melodramatic as it may sound, it also has application in the world of business as well. Specific to the leasing industry, the phrase connotes a clause or condition of a leasing agreement that mandates the payment of all rent, fees, and costs to the lessor by the lessee, regardless of any intervening circumstances. Put succinctly, a lessee executing a deal with a "hell or high water clause" waives all of its defenses and is indefeasibly bound to pay its due to the lessor.
Managing the Risks of Doing Business in Latin America
September 09, 2004
Every business must manage some degree of risk. Venturing into the Latin American marketplace, according to popular perception, is a particularly risky business.
<b><i>Commentary</b></i> The Strange Case Of Justice Breyer
September 08, 2004
After the U.S. Supreme Court came down with its last decision in June, <i>Ashcroft v. American Civil Liberties Union</i>, PBS Newshour commentator Margaret Warner asked rhetorically: Why in the world was Supreme Court Justice Stephen G. Breyer in the dissent?
Grokster Wins Peer-to-Peer Battle
September 08, 2004
In what is poised to spark a debate of significant economic impact for the entertainment industry in the United States Supreme Court, a unanimous panel of the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals recently ruled that Grokster, Ltd. and StreamCast Networks, Inc. ' distributors of the Morpheus program ' will live another day, as they do not infringe film and music copyrights by facilitating file-sharing over the Internet.
Cases of Note
September 08, 2004
Cases of interest to the Internet law community.<br><b>Commercial Web Site Does Not Violate DMCA <br>Texan's Web Site Not Violative of ACPA<br></b>
MOST POPULAR STORIES
- Strategic Uses of a Rule 2004 ExamWhile most bankruptcy practitioners are familiar with the basic concepts behind the Rule 2004 exam, some are less familiar with the procedural intricacies of obtaining, conducting, and responding to the exam ' intricacies that often involve practices and procedures adapted from civil discovery that are beyond the scope of pure bankruptcy practice. This article explains.Read More ›
- COVID-19: Economic Stimulus and SBA LoansA summary of information on the various provisions under the new federal economic stimulus package.Read More ›
- Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright LawsThis article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.Read More ›
- Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult CoinWith each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.Read More ›