HNRK Coverage Corner

On May 9, 2024, Judge Theodore C. Zayner of the California Superior Court for the County of Santa Clara issued a decision in Zoom Video Communications, Inc. v. Underwriters at Lloyd’s London, Case No. 22-CV-398878, holding that a civil investigative demand (“CID”) from the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) did not constitute a covered “Claim” under an errors and omissions policy issued to Zoom.

Responding to a government investigation can be a costly proposition.  The attorneys’ fees and other expenses incurred to comply with a grand jury subpoena or a civil ...

On May 10, 2023, Judge Komitee of the EDNY issued a decision in Huang & Assocs., P.C. v. Hanover Ins. Co., Case No. 21-CV-4909(EK)(RER), holding that a law firm (Huang & Associates) was not entitled to coverage under its professional malpractice policy, for a negligence claim brought by a client whose funds were misappropriated by a third-party in a “real-estate transaction that went badly.”

The firm’s policy had an exclusion for any claim “[b]ased upon or arising out of, or relating directly or indirectly to . . . [a]ny actual or alleged conversion, commingling, defalcation ...

On November 30, 2018, Judge Kahn of the NDNY issued a decision in Young Men’s Christian Assn v. Philadelphia Indem. Ins. Co., Case No. 18-cv-0565 (KEK/DJS), denying an E&O insurer's motion to dismiss the insured's claim for amounts it was required to contribute to employee retirement accounts because of the insured's negligent failure to withdraw contributions from the employees’ paychecks.

Plaintiff YMCA made a claim under an errors and omissions policy after discovering that its executive director had negligently failed to make both employer and employee ...