“Oil in the Gulf: Litigation & Insurance Coverage”

May 5, 2010

Looking to learn more about the oil spill in the Gulf and the Deepwater Horizon Drilling Rig explosion?  Want to know what sort of insurance coverage could cover resulting liability, first party, business interruption, contingent business interruption, and other claims?

Then you should check out the Oil in the Gulf: Litigation & Insurance Coverage Teleconference, hosted by my friends at HB Litigation Conferences.

My colleague, Selena Linde, will be one of the two speakers for the event.  On the agenda, among other things, will be:

  • The recent Gulf Disaster-Deepwater Horizon Drilling Rig explosion, sinking and spill
  • Who will the claimants be and what theories of liability will prevail?
  • Analysis of the applicable coverage claims and exclusions including business interruption, property and environmental coverage claims
  • Unique state law issues for insurers in direct action states, such as Louisiana

To register, you can download the Registration Form (PDF) and mail/fax/email it to HB Litigation Conferences, complete the online form, or e-mail or call Brownie Bokelman at 484-324-2755 x 212 to register.

Disclaimer:

This blog is for informational purposes only. This may be considered attorney advertising in some states. The opinions on this blog do not necessarily reflect those of the author’s law firm and/or the author’s past and/or present clients. By reading it, no attorney-client relationship is formed. If you want legal advice, please retain an attorney licensed in your jurisdiction. The opinions expressed here belong only the individual contributor(s). © All rights reserved. 2010.

myspace profile views counter

Leave a Comment » | Business interruption, Contingent business interruption, Environmental insurance coverage, First party insurance coverage, Pollution exclusion, Pollution insurance, Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Scott Godes

Can companies that recycle waste into other products ensure insurance coverage?

March 17, 2010

In Christie Smythe’s article “Innovative Recycling Cos. Battle Pollution Exclusions” for Law360, she discusses whether companies “that recycle waste by converting it into products — turning tires into mulch or turkey offal into biodiesel, for instance” will get coverage for pollution-based claims, even if the policyholders told their insurance companies about the nature of their business.  The story is an interesting tale of companies that convert energy byproducts and agricultural waste into other products and their efforts to get insurance coverage for claims against them.

Ms. Smythe was kind enough to quote me at the end of the article.  I explained a best practice for corporate policyholders, in light of insurance industry practice.  Want to read the quote?  Click on over to the full article to read more.

Disclaimer:

This blog is for informational purposes only. This may be considered attorney advertising in some states. The opinions on this blog do not necessarily reflect those of the author’s law firm and/or the author’s past and/or present clients. By reading it, no attorney-client relationship is formed. If you want legal advice, please retain an attorney licensed in your jurisdiction. The opinions expressed here belong only the individual contributor(s). © All rights reserved. 2010.

myspace profile views counter

1 Comment | Environmental insurance coverage, Pollution exclusion, Pollution insurance, Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Scott Godes

Court grants motion to amend to add insurance company as defendant.

September 10, 2009

Law360 published a piece about a court decision granting a motion to amend that I wrote.  In short, I represented a policyholder that suffered an explosion and fire at its plant and sought insurance coverage for the related losses.  The policyholder had brought suit against its first party property insurers, and then sought leave to amend to add its pollution liability carrier.   The Federal District Court for the District of New Jersey granted the contested motion.  For the full piece, click here (subscription required).

Disclaimer:

This blog is for informational purposes only. This may be considered attorney advertising in some states. The opinions on this blog do not necessarily reflect those of the author’s law firm and/or the author’s past and/or present clients. By reading it, no attorney-client relationship is formed. If you want legal advice, please retain an attorney licensed in your jurisdiction. The opinions expressed here belong only the individual contributor(s). © All rights reserved. 2009.
myspace profile views counter

Leave a Comment » | Environmental insurance coverage, First party insurance coverage | Tagged: , | Permalink
Posted by Scott Godes

Welcome, Steve Goldberg!

August 9, 2009

Steve Goldberg, a colleague of mine at Dickstein Shapiro LLP, has joined the blogosphere.  Steve just started writing the Catastrophic Insurance Coverage Blog.  Surf on over to his blog and give his pieces a read.  Steve’s a sharp lawyer who is another terrific advocate for corporate policyholders.

myspace profile views counter

Disclaimer:

This blog is for informational purposes only. This may be considered attorney advertising in some states. The opinions on this blog do not necessarily reflect those of the author’s law firm and/or the author’s past and/or present clients. By reading it, no attorney-client relationship is formed. If you want legal advice, please retain an attorney licensed in your jurisdiction. The opinions expressed here belong only the individual contributor(s). © All rights reserved. 2009.

1 Comment | Environmental insurance coverage | Tagged: | Permalink
Posted by Scott Godes

Thanks, Blawg Review #205!

March 30, 2009

If I was not a serious blogger about insurance coverage issues, I would make a comment here, with a wink to the old The Jeffersons tv show about how I’m “movin’ on up,” to let you all know that I was featured in Blawg Review #205.  But this is a serious blog about serious issues relating to insurance coverage, so I will not.

The review cited my post about the State of California environmental coverage case and the article by my colleague, Steve Goldberg.  You can find Blawg Review #205 hosted over at Declarations & Exclusions, which, if you are not familiar with it, offers “News and Comment on California Insurance Law, the Politics of Insurance, and Other Risky Business.”  (Again, the serious blogger here would not suggest that presumably, the “Risky Business” relates to insurance topics, and not Tom Cruise sliding across a living room, so I will refrain.)

When you have a free moment, surf on over to Blawg Review #205, and check it out.

myspace profile views counter

Disclaimer:

This blog is for informational purposes only. This may be considered attorney advertising in some states. The opinions on this blog do not necessarily reflect those of the author’s law firm and/or the author’s past and/or present clients. By reading it, no attorney-client relationship is formed. If you want legal advice, please retain an attorney licensed in your jurisdiction. The opinions expressed here belong only the individual contributor(s). © All rights reserved. 2009.

Leave a Comment » | Blawg Review, Environmental insurance coverage | Tagged: , | Permalink
Posted by Scott Godes

Steve Goldberg on “Sorting Out a Liability Mess”: An Analysis of State of California v. Allstate Insurance Company

March 23, 2009

Steve Goldberg My colleague, Steve Goldberg, recently wrote a column for the Los Angeles Daily Journal regarding the recent State of California v. Allstate Insurance Company insurance coverage decision relating to the Stringfellow Acid Pits, including a discussion of the pollution exclusion.

Victoria Pynchon There is a nice excerpt of the article on Victoria Pynchon’s terrific Settle It Now Negotiation Blog, which begins:

In State of California v. Allstate Insurance Company, 2009 DJDAR 3425 (March 9, 2009), the California Supreme Court reversed a trial court’s grant of summary judgment for a handful of insurance carriers who refused to defend the state against and indemnify it for liabilities arising from an infamous toxic waste site – the Stringfellow Acid Pits. Neither this opinion, nor another in the same matter handed down by the 4th Appellate District in January, finally resolves the state’s claims. Instead, both courts sent two groups of insurance carriers back to the trial court for further proceedings. In both, the insurers lost significant battles but will no doubt continue the fight on yet another day.

Continue reading Steve’s article here.

The take away from this article for risk managers and in house counsel is that coverage may be available for liabilities even after coverage has been denied.  Insurance coverage always is important to policyholders, but in an economic downturn, insurance coverage is essential.

myspace profile views counter

Disclaimer:

This blog is for informational purposes only. This may be considered attorney advertising in some states. The opinions on this blog do not necessarily reflect those of the author’s law firm and/or the author’s past and/or present clients. By reading it, no attorney-client relationship is formed. If you want legal advice, please retain an attorney licensed in your jurisdiction. The opinions expressed here belong only the individual contributor(s). © All rights reserved. 2009.

4 Comments | Defense Costs, Environmental insurance coverage, Pollution exclusion | Tagged: , , | Permalink
Posted by Scott Godes

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,353 other followers