Earlier this week, in Nationwide Mutual Fire Ins. Co. v. McDermott, the Sixth Circuit affirmed a district court’s determination that damages from a butane fire in a basement marijuana lab would not be covered by the homeowner’s insurance policy, but not for the reasons one might expect. The Court’s holding was based on the homeowner’s … Continue Reading
Earlier this week, the Sixth Circuit upheld a Michigan district court’s decision that a commercial general-liability insurance policy did not cover a short-term worker injured at a farmer’s market in Michigan. Judge Stranch’s opinion for the court, however, is most interesting for its lengthy discussion of the contours of declaratory judgment actions in the circuit. … Continue Reading
After settling with the original defendant, the plaintiffs in a class action sued the defendant’s insurance company over a $2 million policy. The insurer won summary judgment and the plaintiffs appealed. In The Siding and Insulation Co. v. Acuity Mutual Ins. Co., the Sixth Circuit held that the claims of individual plaintiffs could not be … Continue Reading
In Goodyear v. Nat’l Union Fire Ins., Goodyear sought recovery from two of its insurers for fees and costs incurred defending against an SEC investigation and a class action initiated after the company’s announcement that it would restate its earnings for certain previous years. The SEC ultimately terminated the investigation and the lawsuit was dismissed, … Continue Reading
In The Heil Co. v. Evanston Insurance Co. (No. 11-6252), the Sixth Circuit vacated a jury’s verdict and its award of $2 million in punitive damages in favor of The Heil Company. The lawsuit arose out of Evanston Insurance Company’s defense of a wrongful death suit brought against Heil. Heil sued Evanston in 2008 for Evanston’s … Continue Reading
In The Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company v. National Union Fire Insurance Company of Pittsburgh, et al., Goodyear sought reimbursement from its directors and officers liability policies issued by National Union Insurance Company of Pittsburgh (“National Union”) and Federal Insurance Company (“Federal”) for legal costs incurred in defending numerous securities class action and derivative lawsuits … Continue Reading
This week, the Court interpreted a commonly-litigated “your work” insurance exclusion found in most commercial general liability policies. The Court’s holding didn’t go as far as the plaintiff wanted, but it may broaden coverage significantly depending on the facts at issue. In Mosser Const., Inc. v. Travelers Indem. Co., No. 09-4449 (pdf), the Court held that the term … Continue Reading
On Monday, the Sixth Circuit affirmed dismissal of insurance coverage claims against an umbrella insurer for defense costs associated with asbestos claims. Federal-Mogul v. Continental Casualty, No. 10–1290 (6th Cir. July 11, 2011) (pdf). This ruling leaves the other insurers to pick up the entire defense bill until their limits are exhausted. According to the Court’s decision, only then would … Continue Reading
In our BREAKING NEWS item on Wednesday, we were one of the first legal blogs to report on and analyze the Sixth Circuit’s high profile opinion in Thomas More Law Center, et al. v. Obama, et al. (Sixth Circuit, Case No. 10-2388), in which a divided panel upheld the constitutionality of the mandate requiring individuals to purchase … Continue Reading
If you have been following my blog posts for the last half year, you know I have been predicting that the Sixth Circuit was poised to become the first appellate court in the country to rule on the constitutional challenge to the mandate requiring individuals to purchase health insurance under the recently enacted Patient Protection … Continue Reading
As we previously reported and analyzed, Acting Solicitor General Neal Katyal was in Cincinnati, Ohio last week before the Sixth Circuit to argue the government’s position in the appeal involving a constitutional challenge to the mandate requiring individuals to purchase health insurance under the recently enacted Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, Public Law 111-148. … Continue Reading
Outside on the downtown streets of Cincinnati yesterday, the city was alive with political and legal debates, including a spirited protest by members of the Cincinnati tea party. That’s because inside Cincinnati’s federal courthouse, in a standing room only courtroom, the Sixth Circuit heard oral argument in the high-profile appeal involving a constitutional challenge to the … Continue Reading
Tomorrow is the big day in the Sixth Circuit. The Court will hear oral argument in the high-profile appeal involving a constitutional challenge to the mandate requiring individuals to purchase health insurance under the recently enacted Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, Public Law 111-148. See Thomas More Law Center, et al. v. Obama, et … Continue Reading
One week from today, the Sixth Circuit will hear oral arguments in the high-profile appeal involving a constitutional challenge to the mandate requiring individuals to purchase health insurance under the recently enacted Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, Public Law 111-148. See Thomas More Law Center, et al. v. Obama, et al. (Sixth Circuit, Case … Continue Reading
When a district court certified a class of Ohio homeowners alleging failure by title insurers to provide a merited discount, post-certification discovery revealed the individualized nature of the inquiries necessary for the homeowners to prove their case and thus demonstrated that certification had been improvidently granted. The district court subsequently decertified the class, which, expressing … Continue Reading
As you know, for months now we have been following the case making its way through the Sixth Circuit involving a constitutional challenge to the mandate requiring individuals to purchase health insurance under the recently enacted Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, Public Law 111-148. See Thomas More Law Center, et al. v. Obama, et … Continue Reading
If you are a regular follower of our blog, you know that we have been closely tracking the case making its way through the Sixth Circuit involving a constitutional challenge to the mandate requiring individuals to purchase health insurance under the recently enacted Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, Public Law 111-148. See Thomas More … Continue Reading
In a decision involving determination of a life insurance policy’s proper beneficiary, the Sixth Circuit ruled that the language of ERISA and the insurance policy must be followed before a court may resort to the application of federal common law. In Union Security Insurance Co. v. Blakeley (6th Cir., No. 09-4368, Feb. 15, 2011) [PDF], … Continue Reading
For the last several months, we have been following the case making its way through the Sixth Circuit involving a constitutional challenge to the mandate requiring individuals to purchase health insurance under the recently enacted Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, Public Law 111-148. See Thomas More Law Center, et al. v. Obama, et al. … Continue Reading
As we have been reporting on this blog, the Sixth Circuit is preparing to address the constitutionality of the mandate requiring individuals to purchase health insurance under the recently enacted Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, Public Law 111-148. See Thomas More Law Center, et al. v. Obama, et al. (Sixth Circuit, Case No. 10-2388). … Continue Reading
The Sixth Circuit affirmed the Western District of Kentucky’s grant of summary judgment in favor of an insurer, concluding that the insurer had no duty to defend the insured company who hired a person alleged to have disclosed to the company the proprietary information of his former employer. Capital Special Insurance v. Industrial Electronics, LLC, Case No. 09-6368 (PDF) … Continue Reading
As we reported on Monday, a Virginia federal judge made national headlines when he declared that the mandate requiring individuals to purchase health insurance under the recently enacted Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, Public Law 111-148, is unconstitutional. See Commonwealth of Virginia, et al. v. Sebelius (E.D. Va., Case No. 3:10-cv-188) (PDF). On Tuesday, it was reported that the … Continue Reading
A federal district judge in Virginia ruled today that the new health care law’s mandate requiring individuals to purchase health insurance is unconstitutional, becoming the first court in the country to invalidate any part of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, Public Law 111-148, signed into law by President Obama on March 23, 2010. See Virginia v. … Continue Reading
