Insights

Washington – January 3, 2019: Crowell & Moring LLP is pleased to announce that it has elected eight lawyers to the firm’s partnership, effective January 1, 2019. The firm has also promoted 21 associates to the position of counsel. The new partners have been promoted from within the ranks of the firm’s Washington, New York, and Brussels offices, and underscore the firm’s commitment to its Corporate, Government Contracts, Intellectual Property, International Trade, Litigation, Mass Tort, Product & Consumer Litigation, and Privacy & Cybersecurity practices.

On November 15, 2023, the Attorney General of New York filed suit against PepsiCo, Inc., seeking to hold the soft drink and snack food manufacturer liable for plastic waste on the shores of the Buffalo River under multiple theories including public nuisance, strict product liability for failure to warn, violation of New York General Business Law Section 349 (deceptive trade practices) and New York Executive Law Section 63 (12) (persistent fraud or illegality in conduct of business).  

On January 29, 2020, Delaware’s highest court issued an important ruling on whether an insured’s intentional assault was an “occurrence” under a homeowner’s insurance policy and the application of an expected or intended exclusion, reversing a ruling below which found coverage for a policyholder’s intentional assault that resulted in the claimant’s death. USAA v. Carr, No. 273,2019 (Del. Jan. 29, 2020). The ruling is significant because hundreds of cases involving assault, sexual misconduct, and other intentional conduct by insureds, in both the personal and commercial contexts, pose similar questions about coverage for harm resulting from intentional conduct.

On December 13, 2018, in answer to a certified question concerning Nevada insurance law, the Supreme Court of Nevada overturned a trial court ruling that suggested insurers could have automatic liability for an excess judgment based on a good faith breach of the duty to defend. While the Nevada Supreme Court didn’t cap insurers’ exposure at policy limits plus costs of defense – as a majority of jurisdictions have done – it enunciated a standard that will often produce the same outcome or an even more conservative one. The Nevada Supreme Court held that an insured may recover consequential damages from an insurer that breaches its duty to defend, which could include a judgment that exceeds policy limits, but only if the insured can establish that the judgment was a consequence of the insurer’s breach and that the insured took “all reasonable means to protect himself and mitigate” the loss. 

Crowell and Moring attorneys are featured in the nation’s premier insurance coverage meeting, the ABA Insurance Coverage Litigation Committee CLE Seminar where attendees learn about the very latest developments in insurance law from leading lawyers and insurance professionals. Partner Laura Foggan is speaking on privacy terms and other implications of the GDPR, Partner Mark Plevin is addressing differences in coverage allocation law across several key jurisdictions and Counsel Stephanie Corrao is discussing insurance coverage for cyber losses.  

One of the most significant issues in insurance coverage litigation is the choice of law to be applied. The judicial resolution of many significant coverage issues often differs significantly from state to state. The determination of which state's law applies to the coverage dispute may be one of the most crucial determinations, and understanding how the forum court arrives at an answer on that application can mean the difference between winning and losing for clients. This panel features Counsel Stephanie Corrao along with other thought leaders in choice of law issues and strategies in insurance coverage disputes.