The WordPress.com stats helper monkeys prepared a 2013 annual report for this blog.
Here’s an excerpt:
The concert hall at the Sydney Opera House holds 2,700 people. This blog was viewed about 9,300 times in 2013. If it were a concert at Sydney Opera House, it would take about 3 sold-out performances for that many people to see it.
I’m honored that that Lexis’ Insurance Law Community has nominated the Corporate Insurance Blog as one of its Top 50 Insurance Blogs for 2011. Here is how Lexis describes the Corporate Insurance Blog:
Corporate Insurance Blog
https://corporateinsuranceblog.com/
Written and Maintained by Scott Godes
This blog is for corporate policyholders, risk managers, and in-house counsel who deal with insurance policies, programs, purchases, renewals, claims, and recovery. It offers a fresh perspective, top notch writing, keen insight, and tackles the tough issues head on.
Thanks, Lexis, for the kind words!
Lexis has explained the process for narrowing down the list of nominees to the 50 final top blogs for 2011. I’d appreciate it if you’d submit a comment in support of the Corporate Insurance Blog. Here’s how Lexis explains the process:
The Top Blogs campaign on the LexisNexis Insurance Law Community will move ahead in several phases. We will start by taking nominations during a comment period that starts today and ends on October 7, 2011. We have gathered a group of initial nominees, which are listed below, and we welcome our Community members to make additional nominations and support their favorite blogs. We will select the Top 50 based on our review of the sites and comments from our Community members.
To “talk up” or nominate your favorite Insurance Law blog, you will need to be a registered Community member and be logged in. If you have not registered previously, follow this link to create a new registration or use your sign in credentials from your favorite social media site. Registration is free! Once you are logged in, scroll all the way to the very bottom of this page. You should see a comment box similar to this one:
Add a comment in the box at the bottom of the page to vote or nominate your favorite blog, and that’s it! If you are having problems registering, click here, or please contact us at ted.zwayer@lexisnexis.com. As a Community Manager, I want to make sure that everyone gets to vote!
We would also appreciate your help with spreading the news about our Top Blogs campaign. Please tell your colleagues and your online groups and networks that our Insurance Law Community is seeking nominations and comments for the Top 50 Insurance Law Blogs so that they can participate in our recognition event. After all, it’s only through input from others that we can continue to maintain the value and quality that our Community relies upon when it searches our Top Blogs for insight and information.
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. 2011.
Looking for a treatise on insurance coverage? How about one that has an entire chapter on insurance coverage for cybersecurity and intellectual property claims and risks?
Remember when I wrote that I had written a chapter on insurance coverage for cybersecurity and intellectual property claims for the New Appleman Law of Liability Insurance Treatise? Of course you do. And you probably were wondering, “When will I be able to buy that treatise, so that I can have it on my bookshelf and refer to it regularly for all of my questions about insurance coverage for cybersecurity and intellectual property claims?!?” Well, here’s your answer. The treatise is available on the Lexis website. That’s right! Although you really will want to race right to Chapter 18 – Insurance Coverage for Intellectual Property and Cybersecurity Risks, so that you can read about insurance for data breaches, DDoS attacks, viruses, hackers, cybercrime, and IP losses, you’ll get the whole treatise, too. It’s a five volume looseleaf set that gets updated with supplements.
So what are you waiting for? Click here to order your very own treatise.
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.
Tomorrow, I’ll be speaking at the ACI Bad Faith Litigation Conference in Orlando, Florida. I will be giving the View from the Policyholder’s Bar on bad faith claims. Here are additional details about the conference:
Tuesday, November 30 to Wednesday, December 01, 2010Hyatt Regency Grand Cypress, Orlando, Florida, United StatesWhy do so many defense counsel, plaintiff attorneys and in-house insurance professionals attend this event every year?
Because this unique event combines a multi-disciplinary, cross-country faculty from both sides of the issue, making it the event the industry relies on to get practical strategies for resolving coverage disputes, mitigating risk, and gaining the upper-hand in bad faith lawsuits.
Bad faith litigation claims are on the rise and showing no signs of slowing down. With juries returning larger than ever verdicts, the stakes are high for plaintiffs and defendants alike. Never has there been a more important time for attorneys and in-house professionals to be able to skillfully maneuver through the bad faith litigation process.
At American Conference Institute’s 21st National Advanced Forum on Bad Faith Litigation, the best and the brightest in the bad faith industry will share their insights and winning strategies on critical issues. Featuring:
- A judicial panel with jurists from around the country;
- A keynote address from insurance commissioners in two “hotbed” states;
- An in-house counsel and claims examiner panel; and
- Insights from the policyholders’ bar
No other conference in the industry allows you to interact with the leaders in the industry while hearing the theories and defenses that can turn cases for or against you!
Litigators who specialize in bad faith should attend this conference to get practical strategies and exchange tactics with some of the most successful lawyers in the country who bring and defend these cases regularly. Panels will shed light on the most effective ways to utilize the pleading stages to glean an advantage, developing evidence with an eye towards structuring dispositive motions, implementing credible case themes and properly managing discovery, among others.
In-house counsel and claims professionals know that as fast as insurance companies are responding to allegations of bad faith and implementing procedures to protect themselves from further litigation, plaintiffs’ counsel are creating new strategies for bringing – and winning – bad faith claims. Insurance professionals need to be at this conference to gain insights on new plaintiffs’ approaches and defense arguments so they can think strategically and proactively work to reduce bad faith claims.
This conference will provide even the most seasoned professionals with confi dence and clarity on today’s paramount bad faith issues facing the insurance industry. Come prepared with your most important and pressing questions and concerns to get the most out of this interactive conference.
Plus, add value to your attendance by also registering for our pre- and post-conference workshops:
A. Current Events In Bad Faith: The Gulf States
November 29, 2010 | 2:00 p.m. – 5:00 p.m.Post-Conference Concurrent Workshops on Bad Faith Hotbeds
December 1, 2010 | 2:30 p.m. – 5:30 p.m.B. Florida C. California D. Pennsylvania
Want to join me there? Then click here 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.
Note: as a speaker at the conference, I will not be charged a fee to attend the remainder of the conference.
I was pleasantly surprised this evening to see that Lexis’ Insurance Law Community has nominated the Corporate Insurance Blog as one of its Top 50 Insurance Blogs for 2009. Here is how Lexis describes the Corporate Insurance Blog:
Corporate Insurance Blog
https://corporateinsuranceblog.com/
Written and Maintained by Scott Godes
This blog is for corporate policyholders, risk managers, and in-house counsel who deal with insurance policies, programs, purchases, renewals, claims, and recovery. It offers a fresh perspective, top notch writing, keen insight, and tackles the tough issues head on.
Thanks, Lexis, for the kind words!
If Lexis were taking viewer votes, I would ask that you surf over to the virtual polling place and When Lexis e-mails you with the link to vote (see the update below), please vote early and often for this humble blog. You can still comment on the Lexis ILC page to let them know that they made the right choice.
Update (6/29/10): My friend, Karen Yotis, who is the Community Manager – LexisNexis Insurance Law Center Content Development/Web 2.0, e-mailed me to give me more information about the ILC Top 50 Insurance Blog nomination. Karen explained that there will be voting, and it will take place via an e-mailed link at some point mid-July. So keep your eyes open. Karen also gave me the go-ahead to use the spiffy new graphic in the post.
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.
Remember “AIG”? Wasn’t it reported that “AIG [Had] Beg[un A] Name Change to AIU”? But was it the case, as CNNMoney stated, that “Maybe AIU sounded too much like AIG?” thereby leading to a “new company[, which] is Chartis“?
After the name change(s), what happens in insurance coverage disputes? Should AIG member companies be able to preclude the use of the name “AIG”? Insurance Law360 has published a piece that I wrote explaining why AIG member insurance companies should not be able to preclude the name “AIG” from ever seeing the light of day. Here’s the opening paragraph:
Remember the days when AIG was a company and a name with which the insurance companies within the AIG umbrella wanted to be affiliated? It seems that those days are long past. In fact, AIG insurance companies have asked courts to rule in limine that policyholders cannot even mention AIG at trial. Any such efforts should be rejected outright.
The piece notes that in “cases involving AIG member insurance companies, such as Lexington Insurance Company, National Union Insurance Company, and others, AIG likely was involved with the policy and the claim.” Then the piece discusses the reasons why the name “AIG” is relevant and not unduly prejudicial to the AIG member insurance companies. Want to see more? Click on through for the full article.
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.
Can you think of many, or, in fact, any, companies that are risk free when it comes to the areas of intellectual property or cybersecurity? If you represent companies with risks relating to intellectual property and cybersecurity, what insurance coverage would apply if those risks turned into claims and potential liabilities? Are you familiar with the developing body of insurance coverage law in those areas?
I’m the author of a forthcoming treatise chapter that answers those exact questions. It’s the “Insurance Coverage for Intellectual Property and Cybersecurity Risks” chapter of the New Appleman Law of Liability Insurance, Second Edition, to be released in June 2010. Here’s the chapter’s introduction:
Two developing areas of insurance coverage law are the issues of insurance coverage for intellectual property-based claims and cybersecurity-based claims. This chapter describes coverages available for such claims. The chapter first analyzes and details the development of coverage for intellectual property claims through advertising injury found in general liability insurance policies, as well as other coverages. The chapter then analyzes coverage for cybersecurity claims. The area of coverage for cybersecurity claims is, relative to most insurance coverage topics, quite nascent, and the chapter considers decisions that should be seen as analogous to this developing topic. The chapter discusses coverage for cybersecurity claims under general liability, first-party, and other policies, as well as new policies being marketed as specific to cybersecurity risks and claims.
The intellectual property section of the chapter provides a basic overview of various types of intellectual property risks and provides a detailed discussion of how insurance policies apply to those risks. The chapter explains the legal principles at issue when seeking insurance coverage for such risks and potential liabilities. The chapter discusses the majority and minority rules for various issues and provides an analysis of the various exclusions that insurance companies have cited when trying to deny coverage for intellectual property claims.
The cybersecurity section of the chapter provides an overview of the new and growing cybersecurity risks faced today and details what insurance policies apply to those risks. The chapter details how courts have ruled on coverage questions for cybersecurity and computer-related risks and liabilities. For those areas of the law that are not as well-developed, in light of the relatively new nature of cybersecurity risks, the chapter notes analogous caselaw and how those holdings should apply to cybersecurity claims. The section also notes issues to consider for companies in the market for new and specialized cybersecurity insurance policies.
This post appeared originally at the Lexis Insurance Law Community.
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.
My friend Tom Hagy, of HB Litigation Conferences, was thinking about the potential insurance implications for a hypothetical situation where a school gives a student a laptop, and then the school allegedly uses the laptop’s camera to take pictures of the student. What insurance might apply, Tom wondered, to a claim brought against the school by the student? He asked me for some comments.
You can find the full exchange at Tom’s blog post: “High School Laptop Privacy Controversy Triggers Coverage Debate.” Here is a snippet of the exchange on the issue, including thoughts from me and my former colleague, John Gibbons:
A Quick Policyholder View (Replies Encouraged)
So a high school student takes home a school laptop. The school allegedly used the laptop’s video security system to monitor and snap photos of the sophomore. His family sued. The school filed an insurance claim. The carrier sued for a declaration of no coverage. I think that’s where we are so far.
Naturally we at HB are curious about any disputes over insurance coverage, so I asked Scott Godes of Dickstein Shapiro, one of the speakers at HB’s upcomingNetDiligence Cyber Risk & Privacy Liability Forum, for some quick thoughts on the matter. Below is what Scott had to say. We’re looking for other points of view. Please send them to me at tom.hagy@litigationconferences.
Text of Comments from Scott Godes at Dickstein Shapiro . . . .
Without addressing specifically a set of facts or particular insurance policies, I am happy to give the following thoughts about what a policyholder would want to know. I was talking about this type of issue with my colleague John Gibbons, and we had the following thoughts.
First, a denial of coverage is not the end of the line for a policyholder; rather, it is a new beginning for the policyholder. If the policyholder has not already done so, it will need to engage counsel that is experienced in insurance coverage disputes. As you know from your work at HB Litigation Conferences, insurance coverage is a complicated area of the law, with sophisticated counsel representing insurance companies. . . .
Want to read the rest of the post, including the full set of comments from John and me? Click over to High School Laptop Privacy Controversy Triggers Coverage Debate 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.
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.
Are you going to the 2010 Insurance Coverage Litigation Committee CLE Seminar that the American Bar Association Insurance Coverage Litigation Committee is hosting in Tucson, Arizona on March 4-6, 2010? If you are, please sign up for my roundtable presentation, “From Doctors to ‘E-tailers’: The Expanding Market of Cyber Risks and Coverages.” I will be speaking with my friend Dana A. Ferestein on the issues. We’re going to discuss cybersecurity threats and potentially available insurance coverage, along with tips to keep in mind when considering coverage issues under new policies.
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.
Should this be the new corporate mascot for insurance companies? The weasel? Maybe so, based on the title of my colleague, Steve Goldberg’s post: “Insurers Too Often Want to Weasel Out of the D&O Insurance They Sold.”
Steve explains over at the Catastrophic Insurance Coverage blog that “Fortunately, [insurance companies] don’t always succeed, as evidenced by the recent decision discussed below.”
In his post, Steve gives a nice analysis about some of the arguments that insurance companies make when trying to deny coverage for D&O claims. Steve starts out by explaining:
One of the many ways that some insurance companies try to avoid honoring their obligations under D&O insurance policies is to claim that one of the many insureds included within the coverage of the policy took some action that assisted the plaintiffs in the lawsuit against the company and its directors and officers. In doing so, they rely upon the insured vs. insured exclusion. That exclusion is frequently called by way of shorthand the IVI exclusion.
The line from Steve’s post that struck me as most important for corporate policyholders, directors, and officers to keep in mind is:
The moral of these two cases is simple: when the stakes are high, as they most always are in these types of D&O coverage disputes, an insured needs to be ever vigilant and perhaps aggressive when dealing with its carriers as the carriers will often themselves be quite aggressive in seeking to deny coverage.
Steve goes on to discuss recent authority in which courts refused to let insurance companies weasel out of their D&O policy obligations. It’s worth clicking over to Steve’s blog, the Catastrophic Insurance Blog, and giving the piece a read.
And if you haven’t already added Steve’s feed to your newsreader, here’s the link to do so. I added the feed to my Google Reader subscription list as soon as I saw the blog go live. You can also add the feed for the Corporate Insurance Blog to your newsreader by clicking here.
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.
I was happy to see this morning that the Corporate Insurance Blog was featured in Inter Alia. Tom Mighell writes Inter Alia, which is is an internet legal research blog, among other things. It features a wide varieties of blogs discussing legal issues for its blawgs of the day.
Thanks, Tom, for the mention!
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.
Scott N. Godes [formerly] is counsel in Dickstein Shapiro’s Insurance Coverage Practice.
In Sun-Times Media Group, Inc. v. Royal & SunAlliance Ins. Co. of Canada, the Delaware Superior Court considered insurers’ usual arguments as to why they should be able to refuse to advance defense costs, as they promised to do in their policies. The Sun-Times decision considered, and rejected, arguments that the insurers did not have to advance defense costs because of personal conduct exclusions, consent to settle and cooperation clauses, and the priority-of-payments clauses.
Read the rest of the post here, at Lexis’ Insurance Law Center.
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.
Welcome to the Corporate Insurance Blog. More content to follow!
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.
Corporate Insurance Blog 