35 results for 'cat:"Insurance" AND cat:"Covid-19"'.
J. Vos finds a lower court properly dismissed a restaurant owner's claims for lost revenues. The restaurant owner argued that he is entitled to monetary relief after his business plummeted during Covid-19. However, the insurer sufficiently showed in court that the policy covered physical damage to the establishment, and not for a depletion of revenues in connection to the pandemic. Affirmed.
Court: Her Majesty's Court of Appeal, Judge: Vos, Filed On: April 30, 2024, Case #: CA-2023-1729, Categories: insurance, Business Expectancy, covid-19
Per curiam, the appellate division finds that the lower court properly found for the insurer in a suit seeking damages for business losses due to the store's inability to use its premises during the Covid-19 pandemic. The store cannot show that a physical loss occurred in order to trigger coverage under the policy. Affirmed.
Court: New York Appellate Divisions, Judge: Per curiam, Filed On: April 18, 2024, Case #: 02091, Categories: insurance, covid-19, Contract
J. Mahan denies the insurer's motion for summary judgment. The gaming facility brought this claim for breach of contract after the insurer denied coverage for cleanup following the Covid-19 pandemic. Coverage was denied due to there being no actual physical loss. There is a genuine dispute of material fact regarding whether a physical loss occurred or any of the policy exclusions or provisions apply.
Court: USDC Nevada, Judge: Mahan , Filed On: March 29, 2024, Case #: 2:20cv965, NOS: Insurance - Contract, Categories: insurance, covid-19, Contract
J. Pellegrino finds the lower court properly granted the insurer's motion for summary judgment on property damage claims brought by the Native American casino for its closure during the Covid-19 pandemic. It made no allegations of physical property damage that would have been covered under its insurance policy, while the virus was also considered contamination excluded from coverage. Affirmed.
Court: Connecticut Court Of Appeals, Judge: Pellegrino, Filed On: March 28, 2024, Case #: AC45600, Categories: insurance, Native Americans, covid-19
J. Huffman finds the trial court erred in granting an insurer judgment on the pleadings on an insured's claim for Covid-19 business interruption coverage. Unlike most commercial property policies, the subject policy includes a virus endorsement that provides coverage for loss or damage caused by a virus, including the cost of removal. Further proceedings are need to develop facts and evidence about whether exclusions and conditions on the virus endorsement make it impermissibly illusory. Reversed.
Court: California Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Huffman, Filed On: March 25, 2024, Case #: D081132, Categories: insurance, covid-19
Want access to unlimited case records and advanced research tools? Create your free CasePortal account now. No credit card required to register.
Try CasePortal for Free
J. Blackburne-Rigsby upholds the trial court's dismissal of 10 restaurants and bars' action against an insurer for Covid-19-related closure coverage. They fail to show the Covid-19 virus, rather than municipal orders banning in-person dining, caused direct loss or damage to their properties. Affirmed.
Court: DC Court of Appeals, Judge: Blackburne-Rigsby, Filed On: March 21, 2024, Case #: 22-CV-0950 , Categories: insurance, covid-19
J. Oldham finds the district court improperly entered summary judgment in favor of the insurer. After the 2020 SXSW music festival in Austin was cancelled due to Covid-19 concerns, the organizers sought its insurer's defense for the class action filed by certain ticketholders. The insurer responded it had no duty to defend, and the court found the festival sought a covered loss, also holding an exclusion excused the insurer from defending or covering the ticketholders' class action. Because the classes' complaint arises from the festival's refusal to offer refunds, not a professional service, the professional services exclusion does not bar coverage. Reversed.
Court: 5th Circuit, Judge: Oldham , Filed On: March 21, 2024, Case #: 22-50933, Categories: insurance, covid-19, Class Action
J. Shea denies, in part, the insurer's motion to dismiss, ruling that although the Covid-19 testing provider has not supplied evidence of the insurer's denial of other companies, its proof of hundreds of denied claims for reimbursement of its own testing services is sufficient to establish a plausible claim for an unjust business practice under the Connecticut Unfair Trade Practices Act.
Court: USDC Connecticut, Judge: Shea, Filed On: March 12, 2024, Case #: 3:22cv83, NOS: Insurance - Contract, Categories: Health Care, insurance, covid-19
J. Keenan finds the lower court improperly granted class certification to the massage parlors. The parlors lost money during the pandemic when they were closed to avoid the spread of COVID-19. To receive insurance benefits, the parlors would have had to suffer from physical material destruction or material harm to their business. Reversed.
Court: 4th Circuit, Judge: Keenan, Filed On: March 8, 2024, Case #: 22-1853, Categories: insurance, covid-19, Contract
J. Rothstein dismisses the property manager's complaint alleging that the insurance company wrongfully denied the property manager's damage claim regarding Covid-19 infesting the Washington State Convention Center. The property manager is not entitled to coverage because the Washington Supreme Court already concluded that a loss of functionality only occurs when the property is physically affected, not when the property manager could not conduct normal business.
Court: USDC Western District of Washington, Judge: Rothstein, Filed On: February 27, 2024, Case #: 2:23cv1386, NOS: Insurance - Contract, Categories: insurance, Property, covid-19
J. Halligan finds that the appellate division properly held that the operator of multiple restaurants was properly denied insurance coverage after being forced to suspend in-person dining early in the Covid-19 pandemic. The operator failed to demonstrate the insurer breached the contract on business-interruption losses because the policy covered direct physical loss or damage, which required a material change or "complete and persistent dispossession" of the insured property. Affirmed.
Court: New York Court Of Appeals, Judge: Halligan, Filed On: February 15, 2024, Case #: 07, Categories: insurance, covid-19
J. Benton finds a lower court properly dismissed a city's claims for insurance coverage against an insurer. The city argued that it suffered loss of tax revenues during the Covid-19 mandated closures. However, the insurance company sufficiently showed in court that it provided coverage for direct physical business losses, and not the side effects of the pandemic. Affirmed.
Court: 8th Circuit, Judge: Benton, Filed On: February 12, 2024, Case #: 23-1701, Categories: insurance, covid-19
J. Benton finds a lower court properly dismissed a city's claims for insurance coverage against an insurer. The city argued that it suffered loss of tax revenues during the Covid-19 mandated closures. However, the insurance company sufficiently showed in court that it provided coverage for direct physical business losses, and not the side effects of the pandemic. Affirmed.
Court: 8th Circuit, Judge: Benton, Filed On: February 12, 2024, Case #: 23-1701, Categories: insurance, covid-19, Contract
J. Patterson finds that the appellate division properly allowed plaintiff to continue claims seeking insurance coverage for business losses sustained by a casino during the Covid-19 pandemic because the casino failed to establish losses occurred in part due to physical damage, and the contamination exclusion did not reference "viruses" or "pathogens." Affirmed.
Court: New Jersey Supreme Court, Judge: Patterson , Filed On: January 24, 2024, Case #: A-28-22, Categories: insurance, covid-19
J. Lie finds that the trial court properly sided with an insurer that denied coverage for losses that the National Hockey League and professional hockey teams and venues suffered because of the Covid-19 pandemic. The league, teams and venues cannot claim they suffered covered physical loss or damage because their commercial insurance policies' contamination provisions exclude viral contamination. Affirmed.
Court: California Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Lie, Filed On: December 21, 2023, Case #: H050441, Categories: insurance, covid-19
J. Kobes finds a lower court properly ruled in favor of an insurance company on an insured's contract claims. The insured argued that the insurance company was obligated to cover losses as a result of the Covid-19 pandemic. However, the insurer sufficiently showed in court that his policy does not cover business losses. Affirmed.
Court: 8th Circuit, Judge: Kobes, Filed On: December 11, 2023, Case #: 22-3477, Categories: insurance, covid-19
[Consolidated.] J. Wecht finds that the superior court properly ruled that the trial court lacked authority to coordinate actions that had not yet been filed in this case wherein a group of businesses say an insurance company wrongly denied their Covid-19 business interruption loss claims. The coordination claims were not brought at the trial court and thus, could not be brought on appeal at the superior court. Affirmed.
Court: Pennsylvania Superior Court, Judge: Wecht, Filed On: December 8, 2023, Case #: J-13A-2023, Categories: Civil Procedure, insurance, covid-19
[Modified.] J. Hoffstadt makes multiple changes to an opinion's wording and denies a petition for rehearing with no change in judgment. The trial court properly concluded that an insured's loss of use of entertainment venues due to Covid-19 closures was insufficient for coverage under a commercial property insurance policy. Coverage is only available for the direct physical loss or damage to property. Policy clauses for government orders and impediments to access that include the word "event" do not expand coverage in the absence of physical loss or damage. Also, the presence of Covid-19 on a property's surfaces is not physical loss or damage. Affirmed.
Court: California Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Hoffstadt, Filed On: October 19, 2023, Case #: B323865, Categories: insurance, covid-19
J. Calabretta denies, in part, an insurer’s motion to dismiss a business’s claims related to the insurer’s failure to refund or reassess rates during the Covid-19 pandemic. The business has sufficiently pleaded the insurer's failure to adjust the rate or allow it a chance to request an adjustment was an unfair business practice, and has adequately pleaded a claim for restitution.
Court: USDC Eastern District of California, Judge: Calabretta, Filed On: October 18, 2023, Case #: 2:23cv197 , NOS: Insurance - Contract, Categories: insurance, covid-19
Per curiam, the Fifth Circuit finds the district court properly granted the insurance company’s motion to dismiss this suit arising from its denial of coverage for business losses incurred by the restaurant owner during Covid-19 lockdowns. The court properly denied the restaurant owner’s motion to remand to state court as diversity exists among the involved Illinois and Texas entities. The owner cannot plausibly plead that the virus caused direct physical damage to their property as necessary according to the policy. Affirmed.
Court: 5th Circuit, Judge: Per curiam, Filed On: October 11, 2023, Case #: 22-20573, Categories: insurance, Jurisdiction, covid-19
J. Dillard finds the lower court improperly affirmed the denial of the citizen's claim for Covid-19 pandemic unemployment benefits. The lower court incorrectly upheld the state labor department's finding that the citizen was unemployed for reasons unrelated to Covid-19, as the record shows her self-employment running a child care center out of her home and providing Spanish-English translation services was directly affected by the public health emergency sparked by the pandemic, and her admission of fear of exposure to the coronavirus does not refute that her employment was effectively brought to a halt by the pandemic. Reversed.
Court: Georgia Court of Appeals, Judge: Dillard, Filed On: October 3, 2023, Case #: A23A0796, Categories: insurance, Agency, covid-19
J. Hall rules in favor of the insurer in a breach of contract and declaratory judgment action brought by the insureds in a dispute arising out of two policies issued to the insureds before and during the Covid-19 pandemic. The insureds alleged that sub-limits for communicable disease provisions in the policies apply on a per-location basis rather than globally. The policy sub-limits unambiguously apply globally and the insurer has paid out the maximum amount of coverage due under the policies.
Court: USDC Southern District of Georgia, Judge: Hall, Filed On: September 28, 2023, Case #: 1:21cv19, NOS: Insurance - Contract, Categories: insurance, covid-19, Contract
J. Hoffstadt holds that the trial court properly concluded that an insured's loss of use of entertainment venues due to Covid-19 closures was insufficient for coverage under a commercial property insurance policy. Coverage is only available for the direct physical loss or damage to property. Policy clauses for government orders and impediments to access that include the word "event" do not expand coverage in the absence of physical loss or damage. Also, the presence of Covid-19 on a property's surfaces is not physical loss or damage. Affirmed.
Court: California Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Hoffstadt, Filed On: September 21, 2023, Case #: B323865, Categories: insurance, covid-19
J. Cattlett finds a lower court properly dismissed an insurance company's denial of coverage concerning a design engineer's death by Covid-19. The insurance company argued that the design engineer's widow is not entitled for compensatory relief. However, the engineer's widow presented sufficient evidence in court that her deceased husband contracted the virus from a co-worker while on duty, which entitles her compensable relief under Arizona's workers' compensation requirements. Affirmed.
Court: Arizona Court Of Appeals Division One, Judge: Catlett, Filed On: September 21, 2023, Case #: 1 CA-IC 22-38, Categories: insurance, covid-19, Workers' Compensation
J. Cadish grants the insurance company's petition for a writ of mandamus challenging the court's denial of its motion for summary judgment in this insurance dispute. Though the shopping mall suffered significant economic losses due to its abrupt closure during the Covid-19 pandemic, the presence of the virus on the property did not create the requisite "direct physical loss or damage" covered under the policy. The claims cannot stand as a matter of law.
Court: Nevada Supreme Court, Judge: Cadish , Filed On: September 14, 2023, Case #: 84986, Categories: insurance, Damages, covid-19
J. Grasz finds a lower court properly granted summary judgment to a division of workforce service on a job applicant's discrimination claims. The job applicant, who is a native of Mexico who only speaks Spanish, argued that she is entitled to unemployment insurance benefits after she was let go from her job due to Covid-19, and that the department erred in listing her last job as Holiday Inn and not Molly Maid. However, the workforce service presented sufficient evidence in court that she is not entitled to benefits based on her failure to keep track of past earnings. Affirmed.
Court: 8th Circuit, Judge: Grasz, Filed On: August 24, 2023, Case #: 22-2831, Categories: Employment, insurance, covid-19
J. Kobes finds a lower court properly dismissed a bar/ restaurant owner's motion for insurance coverage as a result of the Covid-19 pandemic. The bar/ restaurant owner argued that he suffered a dip in revenues, which entitled him to relief. However, the insurance company presented sufficient evidence in court that his request for coverage for contamination of his establishments do not fall under the policy's lost business income. Affirmed.
Court: 8th Circuit, Judge: Kobes, Filed On: August 21, 2023, Case #: 22-1356, Categories: insurance, covid-19, Contract
J. Brown finds that the trial court properly granted the insurers' joint motion to dismiss a breach of contract action brought by the insured arising from the insurers' refusal to provide coverage for property losses resulting from the Covid-19 pandemic. A majority of courts have rejected similar claims for insurance coverage due to the pandemic. Affirmed.
Court: Georgia Court of Appeals, Judge: Brown, Filed On: August 9, 2023, Case #: A23A0944, Categories: insurance, covid-19, Contract