This is the second in a series of discussions about insurance issues unique to the Lone Star State.
Both bankruptcy and the ability for a policyholder to assign its first-party, bad-faith claim against its insurer can be critical methods of risk mitigation. In our last post on Insurance – Texas Style, we looked at
In Part 1 of this series, we introduced the Federal Acquisition Regulation’s (FAR) approach to insurance and risk allocation in federal procurement, with a focus on FAR Part 28 and the insurance-related clauses in FAR Subpart 52.228. That introductory post surveyed the FAR’s insurance framework and identified three recurring categories of insurance that frequently appear
Insurers often rely on introductory phrases in exclusions, such as the phrase “relating to,” to expand the scope of exclusions beyond all reasonable bounds. The Eleventh Circuit recently reaffirmed that insurance exclusions — including those broadly drafted to exclude any claim “relating to” an excluded risk — should have meaningful limits and must be interpreted
The Eleventh Circuit’s recent decision in L. Squared Industries, Inc. v. Nautilus Insurance Co. offers important guidance for policyholders navigating notice provisions under claims-made insurance policies—particularly when a policy imposes both a policy-period notice requirement and a separate “prompt notice” clause.
L. Squared Industries owned and operated gas stations in Florida and purchased a