Insurer's Duty to Defend: Resolving Cost Issues Strategies for Defense Cost Reimbursement and Allocation

Similar documents
The Insurer's Duty to Settle, Bad Faith, and Verdicts in Excess of Policy Limits

Insurance Coverage for Statutory and Liquidated Damages and Attorney Fees: Policyholder and Insurer Perspectives

Excess Insurer's Duty to Defend and Indemnify Strategies to Broaden or Limit the Scope of the Excess Insurer's Obligations

ALL SUMS VERSUS PRO RATA ALLOCATION, TERMINOLOGY, AND A LOOK AHEAD Audiocast

The Right To Reimbursement Of Defense Costs?

Presenting a live 90 minute webinar with interactive Q&A. Td Today s faculty features:

Wrap Insurance for Construction Projects Understanding Scope of Coverage and Resolving Coverage and Indemnification Disputes

Construction OCIP/CCIP Insurance Programs: Potential Coverage Gaps and Other Coverage Pitfalls

IP Agreements: Structuring Indemnification and Limitation of Liability Provisions to Allocate Infringement Risk

Allocating Risk in Real Estate Leases: Contractual Indemnities, Additional Insured Endorsements and Waivers of Subrogation

IN THE IOWA DISTRICT COURT FOR POLK COUNTY

Allocating Risk in Real Estate Leases: Contractual Indemnities, Additional Insured Endorsements and Waivers of Subrogation

Insurer v. Insurer: The Bases of an Insurer s Right to Recover Payment From Another Insurer*

ADDITIONAL INSURED COVERAGE

Presenting a live 90-minute webinar with interactive Q&A. Today s faculty features:

IP Agreements: Structuring Indemnification and Limitation of Liability Provisions to Allocate Infringement Risk

Presenting a live 90-minute webinar with interactive Q&A. Today s faculty features:

WHAT EVERY LAWYER SHOULD KNOW ABOUT INSURANCE COVERAGE

Insurer's Duty to Defend: Resolving Defense Cost Issues Strategies for Cost Reimbursement and Allocation

for Landlords and Tenants Negotiating Insurance, Indemnity and Mutual Waiver of Subrogation Provisions

RECOVERING MORE INSURANCE FOR SEC AND INTERNAL INVESTIGATIONS

Sharing the Misery: Defects with Construction Defect Coverage

New claim regulations in New York: Key points to know before January 19, 2009

Uninsured and Underinsured Motorist Claims: Leveraging Insurance Stacking

Construction Subcontractor Default Insurance: A Viable Alternative to Performance Bonds?

IP Assets and Infringement Claims: Insurance Coverage Considerations What IP Counsel Needs to Know

Five Questions to Ask to Maximize D&O Insurance Coverage of FCPA Claims

All-Sums-With-Stacking Rule: Landmark Stringfellow Decision

Horizontal vs. Vertical Exhaustion of Insurance: Priority of Coverage and Settlement for Less Than Policy Limits

Navigating the Waters of Large SIRs and Deductibles

Presenting a 90-Minute Encore Presentation of the Teleconference with Live, Interactive Q&A

Presenting a live 90-minute webinar with interactive Q&A. Today s faculty features: Scott D. Brooks, Partner, Cox Castle & Nicholson, San Francisco

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

LITTLE FISH, BIG PONZI: RECOUPING MADOFF LOSSES THROUGH INSURANCE PROCEEDS

Acquiring Real Estate From a Bankrupt Seller: Legal Issues Evaluating Acquisition Options and Navigating Complex Bankruptcy Court Procedures

I. Introduction. Appeals this year was Fisher v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company, 2015 COA

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA JACKSONVILLE DIVISION. v. Case No. 3:17-cv-436-J-32PDB ORDER

THE 24TH ANNUAL INSURANCE SYMPOSIUM: ALLOCATION & OTHER INSURANCE ROBERT J. WITMEYER & KATYA G. LONG

INSURANCE COVERAGE COUNSEL

Notice for Occurrence and Claims-Made Policies: Navigating Notice of Claim vs. Circumstance, Pre-Tender Costs and More

Pitfalls of Adding Clients or Other Design Professionals as Additional Insureds

Case 2:17-cv DAK Document 21 Filed 07/12/17 Page 1 of 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF UTAH

Securities Accounts and Other Investment Property Establishing Control Under the UCC to Perfect Security Interests in Special Collateral Types

The Ever Changing Duty to Defend and. How It s Currently Leading to Bad faith

Insurance Coverage Law Update: The Recent Cases You Need to Know

Insurance Coverage for PATENT Disputes: A QUICK HIT. Presented By Caroline Spangenberg Kilpatrick Stockton LLP December 16, 2010

Forest Labs., Inc. v A rch Ins. Co.

[J ] IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA MIDDLE DISTRICT : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : OPINION. MR. JUSTICE EAKIN Decided: December 22, 2004

To Defend or Not to Defend: The Dilemma for Carriers, Subcontractors and Their Counsel

When Trouble Knocks, Will Directors and Officers Policies Answer?

Personal Injury Claims for Uber and Lyft Accidents: Navigating Complex Liability and Insurance Coverage Issues

ERISA Retirement Plan Investment Management Agreements: Guidance for Plan Sponsors to Minimize Risks

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION

Bank Affiliate Transactions Under Scrutiny Complying With Regulation W's Complex Restrictions on Business Dealings with Affiliate Institutions

ALLOCATION AMONG MULTIPLE CARRIERS IN CONSTRUCTION DEFECT LITIGATION

Exercising Setoff and Recoupment Rights in Bankruptcy

Mastering the PCAOB's New Extensive Reporting Mandate on Firm Activities Preparing Now to Meet Annual and Special Disclosure Requirements

Construction Defect Coverage: Emerging Issues

James P. Bobotek, Partner, Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman, Washington, D.C.

Case 1:15-cv LG-RHW Document 62 Filed 10/02/15 Page 1 of 11

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS TENTH CIRCUIT ORDER AND JUDGMENT *

Coverage Pitfalls for Additional Insureds: Interplay With SIRS and "Other Insurance Provisions," Interpreting AI Endorsements

Insurance Law Update By: Katie E. Jacobi and Michael L. Young HeplerBroom LLC, St. Louis

INSURANCE COVERAGE UPDATE Decisions

Presenting a live 90-minute webinar with interactive Q&A. Today s faculty features:

Presenting a live 90-minute webinar with interactive Q&A. Today s faculty features:

Insurance Bad Faith MEALEY S LITIGATION REPORT. A commentary article reprinted from the November 24, 2010 issue of Mealey s Litigation Report:

Mortgage Foreclosure Responding to Attorneys General Investigations and Minimizing Liability Risk

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS

Insurance Coverage Issues for Lead Paint Claims

Prudential Prop v. Boyle

Managing Multiple Coverage Claims Part II

Builder's Risk Insurance for Construction Projects: Legal Issues Evaluating Scope of Coverage and Resolving Coverage Disputes

30(b)(6) Depositions in Insurance Coverage and Bad Faith Litigation Preparing and Responding to Notices of Corporate Representative Depositions

Severance Plans and ERISA Compliance: Limiting Liability in Design and Implementation of Severance Arrangements

Allocating the Defense: Two Perspectives on Arceneaux and Beyond

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE STATE OF WASHINGTON

Zombie Corporations and CERCLA Liability: Identifying, Reviving and Pursuing Zombie PRPs

Recent Developments in Construction Defect Litigation: Wooddale Builders/Kootenia. by Matthew P. Bandt.

How Independent Am I? Ethical Obligations of Independent Counsel

NEW YORK STATE REGULATIONS APPLICABLE TO THE PLACEMENT OF EXCESS/SURPLUS LINES INSURANCE. Eric A. Portuguese, Esq. Lester Schwab Katz & Dwyer, LLP

New RESPA Regulations for Mortgage Finance: Are You Ready? Complying With the Sweeping Changes in Real Estate Settlement Procedures

ALL SUMS: REALLOCATION WITH NON-SETTLED INSURERS AND APPLICATION OF SETTLEMENT CREDITS. By Martin C. Pentz 1

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE STATE OF WASHINGTON

CONSTRUCTION DEFECTS INSURANCE COVERAGE ISSUES

Case 3:12-cv SCW Document 23 Filed 04/30/13 Page 1 of 7 Page ID #525 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

Insurance Requirement Provisions in Technology Contracts: Mitigating Risk, Maximizing Coverage

State By State Survey:

Presenting a live 90-minute webinar with interactive Q&A. Today s faculty features:

PRESERVING COVERAGE DEFENSES:

3 Recent Insurance Cases That Defend The Duty To Defend

2013 YEAR IN REVIEW SIGNIFICANT DECISIONS IN 2013: INSURANCE LAW UPDATE. By Jennifer Kelley

M&A Buyer Protection Beyond Indemnification and Escrows

THE RULES OF INSURANCE POLICY EXHAUSTION. By Mary E. Borja, Partner, Wiley Rein LLP

2 of 2 DOCUMENTS. No. A COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION THREE

TWO AUTOMOBILES INSURED UNDER FAMILY POLICY DOUBLES STATED MEDICAL PAYMENTS COVERAGE LIMIT OF LIABILITY

Presenting a live 90 minute webinar with interactive Q&A. Td Today s faculty features:

The FCPA and Insurance Coverage: Five Strategies for Protecting Against the Financial Costs of an FCPA Claim

TO DEFEND OR NOT TO DEFEND

Penny Wise and Pound Foolish? Issues for Excess Insurers in the Wake of Comerica and Qualcomm. By Patrick J. Boley

Transcription:

presents Insurer's Duty to Defend: Resolving Cost Issues Strategies for Defense Cost Reimbursement and Allocation A Live 90-Minute Teleconference/Webinar with Interactive Q&A Today's panel features: Jared M. Katz, Partner, Mullen & Henzell, Santa Barbara, Calif. Joseph D. Jean, Counsel, Dickstein Shapiro, New York Benjamin C. Eggert, Partner, Wiley Rein, Washington, D.C. Wednesday, November 11, 2009 The conference begins at: 1 pm Eastern 12 pm Central 11 am Mountain 10 am Pacific Please refer to the dial-in/log-in instructions emailed to registrants to access the audio portion of the conference. CLICK ON EACH FILE IN THE LEFT HAND COLUMN TO SEE INDIVIDUAL PRESENTATIONS. If no column is present: click Bookmarks or Pages on the left side of the window. If no icons are present: Click View, select Navigational Panels, and chose either Bookmarks or Pages. If you need assistance or to register for the audio portion, please call Strafford customer service at 800-926-7926 ext. 10

For CLE purposes, please let us know how many people are listening at your location by closing the notification box, clicking the chat button in the upper right corner, and typing in the chat box your company name and the number of attendees. Then click send.

Mullen & Henzell L.L.P. mh Insurer s s Duty to Defend: Resolving Cost Issues; Strategies for Defense Cost Reimbursement and Allocation Part I: Scope of Duty to Defend Jared M. Katz Litigation Chair Mullen & Henzell L.L.P. 112 E. Victoria Street Santa Barbara, CA 93101 Tel. (805) 966-1501 Fax (805) 966-9204 www.mullenlaw.com

Mullen & Henzell L.L.P. Liability Insurance Policy mh There are 2 duties owed to the insured under a liability insurance policy: 1. Duty to indemnify the insured for liability for covered loss arising from a third party claim; 2. Duty to defend the insured for a third party claim seeking loss that potentially is covered under the policy s s insurance agreement. 112 E. Victoria Street Santa Barbara, CA 93101 Tel. (805) 966-1501 Fax (805) 966-9204 www.mullenlaw.com Notes: The policy terms dictate the coverage. Interpretative rules can vary by jurisdiction. 2

Mullen & Henzell L.L.P. Duty to Defend mh Duty to defend is broader than the duty to indemnify and includes claims that are groundless, false and fraudulent. The duty to defend is just as, if not more, important than the duty to indemnify. Why? 112 E. Victoria Street Santa Barbara, CA 93101 Tel. (805) 966-1501 Fax (805) 966-9204 www.mullenlaw.com The insured s s desire to secure the right to call on the insurer s s resources for the defense of third party claims is, in all likelihood, typically as significant a motive for the purchase of insurance as is the wish to obtain indemnity for possible liability. Montrose Chemical Corp. v. Superior Court (Canadian Universal Ins. Co., Inc.), 6 Cal.4 th 287, 295-96 96 (1993). 3

Mullen & Henzell L.L.P. What Does the Duty Require? mh The insurer is obligated to furnish competent defense counsel for each insured and to provide sufficient funding for the defense. If there is no conflict, the insurer can appoint qualified panel counsel. If there is a conflict, the majority view is that insured is entitled to independent counsel. 112 E. Victoria Street Santa Barbara, CA 93101 Tel. (805) 966-1501 Fax (805) 966-9204 www.mullenlaw.com Issues: Is the claim fully covered? Reservation of rights? Damages in excess of policy limits? Special type of claim? 4

Mullen & Henzell L.L.P. Types of Issues That Might Arise mh Defining a Claim and Pre-Tender Costs Conflicts Requiring Independent Counsel Reservation of Right to Seek Reimbursement of Defense Costs Multiple Insurers/Target Tenders Termination of Duty 112 E. Victoria Street Santa Barbara, CA 93101 Tel. (805) 966-1501 Fax (805) 966-9204 www.mullenlaw.com Settlement 5

Mullen & Henzell L.L.P. When Does the Defense Duty Arise? mh Duty to defend arises upon tender by insured of a claim triggering defense duty under the Policy. How does the Policy define the defense obligation. Sample: We will settle or defend, as we consider appropriate, any claim or suit asking for damages covered by this policy. 112 E. Victoria Street Santa Barbara, CA 93101 Tel. (805) 966-1501 Fax (805) 966-9204 www.mullenlaw.com Issues: Is the defense obligation mandatory? How is a claim or suit defined? 6

Mullen & Henzell L.L.P. Pre-Tender Defense Costs mh Majority view: Pre-tender defense costs are not covered. Reasons: Insurer Not on Notice Before Then Voluntary Payments Clause 112 E. Victoria Street Santa Barbara, CA 93101 Tel. (805) 966-1501 Fax (805) 966-9204 www.mullenlaw.com Practice tips: Exceptions and Counterarguments Tender Letter Seeking Cost Reimbursement Maintaining Communication Post-tender tender defense costs must be reasonable. 7

Mullen & Henzell L.L.P. Independent Counsel mh Majority View: If there is a reservation of rights or other conflict material to the defense, the insured is entitled to independent counsel. The independent counsel controls the defense of the case and is entitled to be paid for reasonable defense costs. California: Statute provides for insurer to pay the same rates as regular counsel in similar actions and binding arbitration of disputes 112 E. Victoria Street Santa Barbara, CA 93101 Tel. (805) 966-1501 Fax (805) 966-9204 www.mullenlaw.com Practice Tips 8

Mullen & Henzell L.L.P. Reservation of Right to Reimbursement mh Majority View: Insurer is entitled unilaterally to reserve right to seek reimbursement for non-covered defense costs. Must be specially reserved or waived. 112 E. Victoria Street Santa Barbara, CA 93101 Tel. (805) 966-1501 Fax (805) 966-9204 www.mullenlaw.com In a mixed action, insurer must defend the entire action, including non-covered claims. Buss v. Superior Court (Transamerica Ins. Co.),, 16 Cal.4 th 35 (1997). 9

Mullen & Henzell L.L.P. Multiple Insurers/Target Tenders mh General Rule: The duty of each insurer co-insuring a risk is evaluated independently based on the policy language. Equitable contribution between insurers. Other Insurance Clauses. Illinois Target Tender Doctrine State Auto Prop. & Cas. Ins. Co. v. Springfield Fire & Cas. Co.,, 2009 Ill. App. LEXIS 994 (Ill. App. Ct. 4 th Dist. Sept. 30, 2009) Not followed in other jurisdictions 112 E. Victoria Street Santa Barbara, CA 93101 Tel. (805) 966-1501 Fax (805) 966-9204 www.mullenlaw.com 10

Mullen & Henzell L.L.P. Termination of Defense Duty mh Conclusion of Litigation Exhaustion of Policy Limits Burning Limits Excess policy issues Withdraw of Defense Burning Limits Defense Duty Not Apply to Cross-Complaints Complaints 112 E. Victoria Street Santa Barbara, CA 93101 Tel. (805) 966-1501 Fax (805) 966-9204 www.mullenlaw.com 11

Mullen & Henzell L.L.P. Settlement Considerations mh Insurer s s Right to Control Defense and Settlement Assignment of Rights if No Defense Provided Claim Release and Withdrawal of Reservation of Right to Seek Reimbursement Deductible and SIR Business Considerations 112 E. Victoria Street Santa Barbara, CA 93101 Tel. (805) 966-1501 Fax (805) 966-9204 www.mullenlaw.com 12

Mullen & Henzell L.L.P. Contact Mullen & Henzell L.L.P. mh We are available for help with California matters. Email: jkatz@mullenlaw.com Website: www.mullenlaw.com We are a 53 year-old law firm with a state-wide practice, including insurance coverage and claims analysis, insurance and bad faith litigation, insurance defense, and complex business and civil litigation. 112 E. Victoria Street Santa Barbara, CA 93101 Tel. (805) 966-1501 Fax (805) 966-9204 www.mullenlaw.com We also handle real estate litigation and transactions, business transactions, estate planning and litigation, and employment and labor counseling and litigation. 13

Allocation of Defense Costs Joseph D. Jean Dickstein Shapiro LLP COPYRIGHT 2009. DICKSTEIN SHAPIRO LLP. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

Introduction Joseph D. Jean, Esq., is Counsel in the Insurance Coverage Practice of Dickstein Shapiro s New York office and focuses on insurance coverage matters, commercial litigation, and alternative dispute resolution in forums throughout the United States. 2 COPYRIGHT 2009. DICKSTEIN SHAPIRO LLP. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

Agenda Methods of Allocation. Allocating between Covered and Non-Covered Claims. Allocating Among Parties. Allocations Involving Uninsured Periods of Time. 3 COPYRIGHT 2009. DICKSTEIN SHAPIRO LLP. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

Methods of Allocation Different Jurisdictions apply different allocation methodologies. All Sums. Pro Rata. Modified Pro Rata. 4 COPYRIGHT 2009. DICKSTEIN SHAPIRO LLP. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

Methods of Allocation: All Sums All-Sums: Once a policy year is triggered by injury or property damage, each of the individual insurance policies in that year must indemnify the policyholder for All Sums for which the policyholder becomes liable. Each triggered policy is jointly and severally liable for All Sums until the policy s limits are exhausted and then the policies that sit above the exhausted policy are called upon in the same manner. Onus is on the insurer to go after other insurance companies via a contribution action. 5 COPYRIGHT 2009. DICKSTEIN SHAPIRO LLP. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

Method of Allocation: Pro Rata Pro Rata: Onus is on the insured. Allocates risk among all triggered policy periods, with each insurance company paying only a share of the policyholder s total damages. When courts adopt proration, they tend to rely upon general principles of equity, rather than policy language. 6 COPYRIGHT 2009. DICKSTEIN SHAPIRO LLP. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

Methods of Allocation Modified Pro Rata Mixed time-on-the-risk and percentage of coverage. New Jersey and New Hampshire. Carter-Wallace, Inc. v. Admiral Ins. Co., 154 N.J. 312, 712 A.2d 1116 (1998); Owens-Illinois, Inc. v. United Ins. Co., 138 N.J. 437, 650 A.2d 974 (1994); Universal-Rundle Corp. v. Commercial Union Insurance Co., 319 N.J. Super. 223, 275 A.2d 76 (N.J. Super. A.D. 1999) (defense costs). EnergyNorth Natural Gas, Inc. v. Certain Underwriters at Lloyd's, 156 N.H. 333, 934 A.2d 51 (N.H. 2007). 7 COPYRIGHT 2009. DICKSTEIN SHAPIRO LLP. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

Practice Pointers Allocating under Pro Rata and Modified Pro Rata can be complex. In New Jersey, courts frequently use a Special Allocation Master at the conclusion of the liability phase. Experts are often necessary. Work closely with your expert and make sure that all policies are included. Coverage charts can be particularly complex and some carriers might have to provide coverage if certain policies were previously exhausted. 8 COPYRIGHT 2009. DICKSTEIN SHAPIRO LLP. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

Methods of Allocation: Is There a Duty to Defend? Where there is a duty to defend, insurer s duty is broad. In most states insurer must defend covered and not covered claims even if just one claim is covered. Seaboard Sur. Co. v. Gillette Co., 64 N.Y.2d 304, 310, 486 N.Y.S.2d 873, 476 N.E.2d 272 (1984); Frontier Insul. Contractors, Inc. v. Merchants Mut. Ins., 91 N.Y.2d 169, 175, 690 N.E.2d 866 (1997). Where there s no duty to defend, insurers often attempt to allocate defense costs between covered and not covered claims. 9 COPYRIGHT 2009. DICKSTEIN SHAPIRO LLP. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

Methods of Allocation: New Jersey The Exception to the Rule Burd v. Sussex, 56 N.J. 383 (1970). Insurers argue that where there is a mixture of covered and not covered claims the duty to defend becomes a duty to reimburse. An Exception to the Rule: SL Indus., Inc. v. American Motorists Ins. Co., 128 N.J. 188, 607 A.2d 1266 (N.J. 1992). The court held that when defense costs cannot be apportioned, the insurer must assume the defense costs for both covered and non-covered claims. 10 COPYRIGHT 2009. DICKSTEIN SHAPIRO LLP. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

Methods of Allocation: What Kind of Policy is at Issue? Claims Made Policies Coverage triggered when a claim is made during the policy period (or extended reporting period). Focus is not when wrongful act was committed, but when claim first is made. Occurrence Policies Coverage triggered by an occurrence. Occurrence is often equated with an "accident. Some policies define occurrence to include "continuous or repeated exposure which results in bodily injury or property damage neither expected nor intended by the insured" and so includes events beyond happenstance accidents. 11 COPYRIGHT 2009. DICKSTEIN SHAPIRO LLP. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

Practice Pointers Review Policy and Complaint Carefully. Allegations in complaint are interpreted broadly and in favor of coverage. An insurer is relieved of the duty to defend only if there is no possible factual or legal basis on which [the insurer] might eventually be held to be obligated to indemnify [the insured] under any provision of the insurance policy. Allianz Ins. Co. v. Lerner, 416 F.3d 109, 115 (2d Cir. 2005) (quoting Servidone Constr. Corp. v. Sec. Ins. Co., 64 N.Y.2d 419, 424, 488 N.Y.S.2d 139, 477 N.E.2d 441 (1985)). Headings do not control. Rather, the substance of the allegations do. See, e.g., NWL Holdings, Inc. v. Discover Prop. & Cas. Ins. Co., 480 F. Supp. 2d 655 (E.D.N.Y. 2007) (finding a duty to defend where, although a complaint did not specifically denominate a cause of action as one that was covered by the policy at issue, the facts alleged therein were sufficient to put the insurer on notice that the complaint could potentially give rise to such a claim). Get creative. There are many situations where the defense of a covered claim is inseparable from the defense of uncovered claims and arguments can be made that the insurer should defend the whole case. 12 COPYRIGHT 2009. DICKSTEIN SHAPIRO LLP. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

Allocation of Defense Costs: Among Insurers Different Types of Policies Respond Differently Primary: Generally have a duty to defend and defense costs are in addition to limits. Excess & Umbrella: May or may not have a duty to defend, but defense costs can erode limits. 13 COPYRIGHT 2009. DICKSTEIN SHAPIRO LLP. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

Practice Pointer New York law mandates, through Insurance Regulation 107, 11 N.Y.C.R.R. 71 ( Regulation 107 ), that liability policies must include defense cost coverage. This result is required by law regardless of any issues pertaining to intent or negotiation amongst the parties. Regulation 107 states (emphasis added): (a) No liability insurance policy, except as specified in this Part, shall be issued or renewed in this State containing a provision that: (1) reduces the limits of liability stated in the policy by legal defense costs; (2) permits legal defense costs to be applied against the deductible, if any; or (3) otherwise limits the availability of coverage for legal defense costs. (c) No liability insurance policy shall be issued or renewed in this State unless legal defense costs are incident to a claim of legal liability covered under the policy. 11 N.Y.C.R.R. 71.2 (SPA14) (emphasis added). Where an insurer issues a policy in violation of this Regulation, a court must reject the violative policy terms and enforce the policy in conformance with the requirements of the Regulation, regardless of any party s intent: [A]ny policy of insurance delivered or issued for delivery in this state in violation of any of the provisions of this chapter shall be valid and binding upon the insurer but in all respects in which its provisions are in violation of the requirements or prohibitions of this chapter it shall be enforceable as if it conformed with such requirements or prohibitions. N.Y. Ins. Law 3103(a) (SPA26) (emphasis added). 14 COPYRIGHT 2009. DICKSTEIN SHAPIRO LLP. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

Allocation of Defense Costs: Competing Policies Similar other insurance clauses cancel each other out and each insurer responds pro rata. Avoiding other insurance clauses? 15 COPYRIGHT 2009. DICKSTEIN SHAPIRO LLP. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

Best Practices Know the Law. Know Your Policies. Know Your Claims. Know What Methodology Maximizes Coverage. Keep Your Insurer Informed. 16 COPYRIGHT 2009. DICKSTEIN SHAPIRO LLP. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

Recoupment of Defense Costs Benjamin C. Eggert Wiley Rein LLP Washington, DC beggert@wileyrein.com November 11, 2009

What happens if an insurer defends but a court later holds there was never duty to defend in the first place?

MAJORITY POSITION Numerous court decisions confirm insurers right to recoup defense costs Leading Case is Buss v. The Superior Court of Los Angeles County, 939 P.2d 766 (Cal. 1997)

MAJORITY POSITION Buss, 939 P.2d 766 (Cal. 1997) Insurer that defends suit with covered and non covered claims can recover defense costs Must show that defense costs are allocable to non covered claims

MAJORITY POSITION Buss, 939 P.2d 766 (Cal. 1997) Reservation of rights required insurer must advise insured of right of recoupment Fair to insured insured can accept defense (subject to recoupment) or defend itself

MAJORITY POSITION Key Considerations Reservation of Rights Quasi contract or implied contract Unjust Enrichment

MAJORITY POSITION Reservation of rights Timely and express reservation Notice of possible reimbursement Insured s acceptance of defense

MAJORITY POSITION Quasi contract or implied contract Flowing from reservation of rights vs. insurance contract Separate/implied agreement No voluntary payment

MAJORITY POSITION Unjust Enrichment An insurer has not assumed the risk to pay claims that were never covered Reimbursement restores parties to the place where they were when they entered the contract

MAJORITY POSITION The Problem with Mixed Action Cases

MINORITY POSITION Some decisions disallow recoupment Leading case is General Agents Ins. Co. of Am., Inc. v. Midwest Sporting Goods Co., 828 N.E.2d 1092 (Ill. 2005)

MINORITY POSITION General Agents, 828 N.E.2d 1092 (Ill. 2005) Court held that if an insurer believes there is no duty to defend, then deny Court ruled that an insured shouldn t be put in Hobson s choice

MINORITY POSITION Key Considerations Some courts believe insurers are acting in self interest in offering defense preserving indemnity rights and ensuring effective defense

MINORITY POSITION Key Considerations Some courts are unconvinced by implied contract and unjust enrichment arguments Some courts appear to view policies as providing litigation insurance

MINORITY POSITION Problems with Rationales No Hobson s choice for insureds Self interest (or lack of self interest) is no basis to reject (or accept) legal right False logic of litigation insurance and broad coverage obligations

Core Points Developing area of the law Decisions go both ways Clear reservation of rights is important to setting the stage for subsequent assertion of right

Questions?