Menu

Ommid C. Farashahi Spoke at American Conference Institute's D&O Liability Conference

October 2013 | Category: News

Ommid C. Farashahi spoke at American Conference Institutes 17th Annual D&O Liability Conference on October 21-22, 2013 in New York, New York. Mr. Farashahi will be a panel speaker discussing topics impacting claims strategies for managing liability risks. Links to the conference agenda, a list of speakers, and registration information for the conference can be found here.

Read Article

Andrew W. Smith Spoke on Insurance Claims Resolution at the American Bar Association's Annual Meeting

August 2013 | Category: News

Andrew W. Smith spoke about insurance claims resolution at the American Bar Association's Annual Meeting in San Francisco, California on August 9, 2013.  The American Bar Association's Annual Meeting runs from August 8-13, 2013, and features numerous agenda items, CLE seminars, and presentations concerning the practice of law. More information concerning the conference as well as registration information can be found here.

Read Article

Offer to Defend Under ROR Could Give Insured Control of Settlement

July 2013 | Category: News

On July 10, 2013, the Superior Court of Pennsylvania issued a ruling that examined law from across the country regarding whether the insured or insurer controls settlement after the insurer defends under a reservation of rights. The Court ruled that Pennsylvania will join the states that give the insured the option of whether to accept the insurer’s defense under a reservation of rights. If the insured accepts such a defense, then the insurer can control settlement decisions. If the insured rejects a qualified defense, then the insured must be granted independent counsel who can then enter any reasonable settlement without the insurer’s consent.

Read Article

Illinois Appellate Court Upholds “Each Occurrence Limit” Instead of “General Aggregate Limits”

July 2013 | Category: News

Bituminous Cas. Corp. v. Iles, et al. (Ill. App. (5th) 2013)

The Illinois Appellate Court for the Fifth District agreed with BatesCarey LLP's client in applying the "Each Occurrence Limit" instead of the "General Aggregate Limit." In Bituminous Cas. Corp. v. Iles, et al., the appellate court reversed a lower court's opinion that applied the "General Aggregate Limits" in the applicable insurance policies rather than the "Each Occurrence Limits." Applying the General Aggregate Limits had the effect of maximizing the policyholder's recovery. However, based on the unambiguous provisions of the contract, the "Each Occurrence Limits" should have applied to the bodily injury and property damage claims caused by an oil well explosion. The appellate court agreed and ruled in favor of BatesCarey LLP's client. John E. Rodewald and John A. Husmann handled all aspects of the litigation the trial court and appellate levels.

Read Article

BatesCarey LLP receives high marks in 2013 Chambers USA for Insurance: Dispute Resolution in Illinois

June 2013 | Category: News

Chambers has praised BatesCarey LLP for its representation of international and domestic insurers and reinsurers. Chambers described the firm as follows:

This specialist insurance firm is known and respected for its longstanding representation of the insurance industry on both a domestic and international basis. The team offers expertise across a range of insurance areas including direct insurance, reinsurance and professional liability. The group also has a prominent presence in construction and transport insurance claims.

Read Article

Eighth Circuit Affirms Trial Verdict in Favor of Client in Lawsuit Brought by Union Pacific

April 2013 | Category: News

Rice v. Union Pacific Railroad Co. (E.D. Ark.) (June 2012), aff’d (8th Cir. 2013)

In Rice v. Union Pacific Railroad Co., the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit affirmed a trial verdict in favor of Gunderson Rail Services, our client. Union Pacific had filed an indemnity action against Gunderson seeking to shift responsibility for the settlement and defense of an incident arising out of a railroad accident. The underlying accident involved a back injury to a Union Pacific employee who slipped in the mud in Gunderson’s yard. Ultimately, the case settled for $1.15M. Union Pacific and Gunderson each paid one half of the settlement and proceeded to trial on Union Pacific’s claim that it was entitled to complete indemnity, making Gunderson pay the entire settlement. After trial, the court held that both Union Pacific and Gunderson shared equally in responsibility for the costs of defense and settlement. Union Pacific appealed, claiming that the trial court erred in ignoring evidence that supported specific sections of the indemnity agreement that would shift all liability to Gunderson. The appellate court disagreed, holding that Union Pacific had failed to prove that those sections applied and affirming the verdict in the trial court. Joe P. Pozen co-chaired the trial and briefed the appeal.

Read Article

Court Upholds Anti-Assignment Provision

February 2013 | Category: News

WASCO v. Bituminous (Ill. App. (1st) 2013)

In WASCO v. Bituminous, WASCO sought coverage under Bituminous policies issued to Palm Oil and PORI International, arguing that the policies were transferred to WASCO or “assigned” to WASCO, or that WASCO was the corporate successor of the named insureds, and therefore entitled to the coverage afforded by the policies. When Bituminous declined to defend WASCO for an underlying environmental claim, WASCO sued Bituminous in Illinois state court, alleging breach of the duty to defend and bad faith claims handling practices.

Read Article