In a ruling of first impression, a Kentucky state court held that the “personal injury” inflicted by malicious prosecution “occurs” at the time of wrongful charging for purposes of triggering insurance coverage in adopting BatesCarey’s argument that the subsequent years of a claimant’s incarceration and suffering constitute resulting “damages” but not new “personal injuries” triggering multiple policy periods.

Agelo Reppas will share guidance and best practices for insurance coverage appeals in connection with her written synopsis co-authored for the ABA Insurance Coverage Litigation Committee at the upcoming ABA Litigation Section seminar.

In Progressive Garden State Ins. Co. v. Metius, a federal district court held that a boat qualified as its owner’s “primary residence,” and after the boat burned and the boat owner filed a claim with its insurer to recover damages, the court held that the insurer’s “primary residence” exclusion in a Boat and Personal Watercraft Policy barred coverage.

BatesCarey is proud to announce three new additions to the Illinois Super Lawyers and Rising Stars lists, totaling 18 named attorneys in 2022.

BatesCarey partner Agelo Reppas recently secured an important victory before the New York Appellate Division, Third Department, which unanimously upheld a judgment finding that two AIG insurers owe no coverage in connection with PFAS environmental contamination claims. Tonoga, Inc. v. New Hampshire Ins. Co., No. 532546, 2022 WL 52903 (N.Y. App. Div. Jan. 6, 2022).

BatesCarey is proud to announce that Abigail Rocap, Justin Seigler and Allyson Spacht have been elected as Partners, and Amanda Bushemi Buckley has been elevated to Special Counsel effective January 1, 2022.

The Supreme Court of Delaware has issued a groundbreaking insurance ruling destined to help define the fundamental bargain at the heart of commercial insurance coverage, and demonstrate why such coverage does not extend to public nuisance claims.  

BatesCarey attorneys Adam Fleischer, Lindsey Dean and Matthew Fortin represented State Automobile Mutual Insurance Company in establishing that, under Texas law, COVID-19 business income claims do not constitute “direct physical loss” and that COVID-19 restrictions did not result from any condition at the insured’s premises.