Most policies provide language requiring that examinations under oath are to be conducted separately, while not in the presence of any other insured. But what about when claims are litigated that were denied based on fraud related defenses—are the plaintiffs sequestered from one another during depositions? 

In a case of first impression, a Connecticut federal court held that a standard virus exclusion precludes coverage for claims of COVID-19-caused business income loss. The insured argued that the loss was caused by stay-at home orders, not the virus, but the court rejected that argument finding that the executive orders were inseparable from the virus itself.

Insurance Coverage Attorney Ryan P. Maxwell was featured in a profile from Business First on December 17, 2020, speaking about business interruption cases stemming from COVID-19 and his career experience. 

Hurwitz & Fine attorneys Lee S. Siegel and Ryan P. Maxwell were featured in the DRI In-House Defense Quarterly Fall 2020 publication for their article, "A One-Two Punch: Michigan State Court Renders First Substantive COVID-19 Decision and It's Big News for Carriers."

Hurwitz & Fine attorneys Dan D. Kohane and Diane L. Bucci partnered with Sherri Pavloff of Stonberg Moran, LLP for the article "Mighty Changes for Declaratory Judgment," which was featured in NYIA's Third Quarter 2020 edition of Your NY Connection magazine.

Insurance Coverage Attorney Ryan P. Maxwell was quoted in the September 22, 2020 edition of Carrier Management.

Attorney Lee S. Siegel provides insight into the Supreme Court of Connecticut case, Nash Street, LLC v. Main Street America Assurance Co.

Hurwitz & Fine’s Coverage Team has compiled a survey of known COVID-19 business interruption complaints filed to date.

Attorneys Michael J. Dischley and Lawrence M. Ross examine choices made by subcontractors or vendors in selecting commercial general liability insurance coverage that can unexpectedly harm the owner/general contractor, let alone, the subcontractor. 

The Joint Panel on Multidistrict Litigation, in a widely anticipated ruling, declined to consolidate all federal COVID-19 business interruption litigation into a single action.

A second court has now found that a typical property insurance policy does not provide business interruption coverage for COVID-19 losses.

Hurwitz & Fine's Insurance Coverage team was quoted in Claims Journal and Insurance Journal on July 7, 2020 for its analysis of the first COVID-19 decision last week by a trial court judge in Lansing, Michigan.

Attorney Lee S. Siegel was quoted in the Best's Insurance News & Analysis July 6, 2020 article.

The Hurwitz & Fine Coverage Team prepared a consolidated resource document comprised of legislative summaries for all proposed state and federal legislation to date concerning COVID-19 business interruption coverage.

The first substantive COVID-19 business interruption decision nationwide is a big win for insurance carriers. A Michigan state court holds that “direct physical loss of or damage to property” requires more than mere loss of use/access, and, as a bonus, that the virus exclusion unambiguously excludes coverage for the viral pandemic.

More than 350 Business Interruption lawsuits have been filed by policy holders against insurers in response to the pandemic. Attorneys Lee S. Siegel and Ryan P. Maxwell talked to Buffalo Business First in the June 5, 2020 edition on what could happen next.

Hurwitz & Fine Insurance Coverage Attorneys Dan D. Kohane, Steven E. Peiper, Agnieszka E. Wilewicz and Charles J. Englert III were featured in the American Bar Association's Tort Trial and Insurance Practice Section Spring 2020 newsletter for their excess insurance case summaries.

In addition to compiling and updating a survey of known COVID-19 business interruption complaints filed to date, Attorneys Lee S. Siegel and Ryan P. Maxwell have published an article in Law360, which analyzes these lawsuits for trends.

Hurwitz & Fine identified and tracked 56 business income complaints filed to date. There are many similarities among the complaints. But complaint number 57 is different, very different. Welcome to “Public Fear” coverage.

Attorneys Agnieszka A. Wilewicz and John R. Ewell co-authored "When Signing Your Client’s Name to an Interrogatory Verification Isn’t Worth It" in the May 6, 2020 edition of the American Bar Association's Practice Points.