Montana Supreme
Insurer that Breached Duty to Indemnify Cannot Be Required to Pay Stipulated Judgment, Montana Supreme Court Rules
The Montana Supreme Court has ruled that an insurance company that breached its duty to defend its insured cannot be required to pay the amount of a stipulated judgment reached by its insured with an underlying plaintiff, observing that the insured in this situation had “little incentive to minimize the settlement amount in negotiating a stipulated judgment.” Read More

New York
New York’s Top Court Rules that “Vandalism” Does Not Require Acts Directed at Covered Policy, But Does Require Malice
In response to two questions relating to a property insurance policy covering acts of “vandalism” certified to New York’s top court, the New York Court of Appeals, by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, the New York Court of Appeals has ruled that.... Read More

New York
N.Y. Workers’ Comp Law Does Not Require Apportionment of Death Benefits Between Work-Related and Non-Work-Related Causes, N.Y.’s Highest Court Rules
New York’s top court, the New York Court of Appeals, has ruled that the state’s workers’ compensation law does not require apportionment of death benefits between work-related and non-work-related causes. That is, the court has decided that the law does not mandate that the state’s workers’ compensation board factor out non-work-related causes of death when making an award. Read More

Connecticut Supreme
Insurance Carrier Had Burden of Proof on Insureds’ Tolling Defense, Connecticut Supreme Court Holds
A divided Connecticut Supreme Court has ruled, 5-2, that an insurance carrier that moved for summary judgment on timeliness grounds based on a Connecticut statute of limitations had the burden to establish that there was no genuine issue of material fact concerning whether the policyholders had brought their action within the period provided by the statute or had met the tolling provisions provided in the statute. Read More