Phish

Phishing in the Dark – Does your Company have a Coverage Blind Spot?

Cyber attacks and data breaches seem to be making headline news almost daily.  As the cyber-security industry evolves and becomes more sophisticated, however, cyber criminals are increasingly targeting an age-old vulnerability – the human element.  Recently, there has been an uptick in “social engineering scams,” including phishing and spear phishing scams, in which cyber criminals trick the recipient of an … Continue reading »

Carbon monoxide detector

Washington Rejects Insurers’ Clever Attempts to Draft Around the Efficient Proximate Cause Rule

The Washington Supreme Court recently issued a new decision that restricts insurance companies with regard to their longstanding attempts to exclude pollution-related losses and draft around Washington’s “efficient proximate cause” rule. Xia v. Probuilders Specialty Ins. Co., et al. In Xia v. Probuilders Specialty Ins. Co., et al., plaintiff Xia became sick from carbon monoxide exposure almost immediately after purchasing … Continue reading »

01330989

“Continuous or Progressive” Damage Exclusion under Commercial General Liability Policies Leads to Catch-22 for Builders and Developers

Commercial General Liability (“CGL”) Insurance policies generally cover an insured for costs the insured becomes obligated to pay due to “bodily injury” or “property damage.”  Thus, on their face, CGL policies appear to cover an insured for a host of potential costs.  However, as many insureds know, a number of exclusions work to limit this seemingly expansive coverage.  Two common … Continue reading »

Washington Supreme Court Insulates Insurance Companies from IFCA Lawsuits Based on Regulatory Violations

The Washington Supreme Court issued a recent decision that significantly limits the scope of claims an insured can make against its insurer under the Washington Insurance Fair Conduct Act (IFCA).  In Perez-Crisantos v. State Farm Fire and Casualty Co., No. 92267-5, WL 448991 (February 2, 2017), the Court insulated insurers that violate insurance regulations by ruling that the insured could … Continue reading »

img_gavelMoney_540x360

Insurer Can’t Unilaterally Limit Rates Payable to Defense Counsel

The Western District of Washington recently ruled that, absent a contrary term in the insurance policy, an insurer does not have the sole power to set the rates it will pay for defending its insured in a lawsuit.  The case, National Union Fire Ins. Co. of Pittsburgh, PA v. Coinstar, Inc., et al., arose after the insured, Redbox, was named as … Continue reading »

Page 1 of 212