Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Verdicts
Insurer Must Indemnify Hospital in Suit Brought 21 Years After Child's Birth
A hospital was entitled to coverage by its insurer even though it notified the insurance company of the suit more than 9 months after it received the summons and complaint because investigation of the claim could not have been begun until many years after the alleged injury anyway. St. Charles Hospital and Rehabilitation Center v. Royal Globe Insurance Co., N.Y.L.J. 5/25/04, LEGAL_BRIEFS; Vol. 100; Pg. 17.
A March 1996 medical malpractice action was brought on behalf of a disabled girl born in March 1975. At the girl's birth, plaintiff hospital was an additional insured on a hospital malpractice liability policy issued by defendant insurer. It was self-insured when the malpractice action was brought. The hospital provided the defendant insurance company with a copy of the summons and complaint in the malpractice action on Jan.15, 1997.
Defendant denied coverage on March 10, 1997, claiming that it did not receive notice until 9 months after the malpractice action was brought. Finding that defendant could not show prejudice, the court ordered its indemnification of plaintiff. Under the circumstances, the court found no sound reason to extend New York's “no-prejudice” standard to a situation where notice of legal action served as notice of claim and where an investigation of the underlying claim could not have been launched any sooner than 21 years after the occurrence.
Insurer Must Indemnify Hospital in Suit Brought 21 Years After Child's Birth
A hospital was entitled to coverage by its insurer even though it notified the insurance company of the suit more than 9 months after it received the summons and complaint because investigation of the claim could not have been begun until many years after the alleged injury anyway. St. Charles Hospital and Rehabilitation Center v. Royal Globe Insurance Co., N.Y.L.J. 5/25/04, LEGAL_BRIEFS; Vol. 100; Pg. 17.
A March 1996 medical malpractice action was brought on behalf of a disabled girl born in March 1975. At the girl's birth, plaintiff hospital was an additional insured on a hospital malpractice liability policy issued by defendant insurer. It was self-insured when the malpractice action was brought. The hospital provided the defendant insurance company with a copy of the summons and complaint in the malpractice action on Jan.15, 1997.
Defendant denied coverage on March 10, 1997, claiming that it did not receive notice until 9 months after the malpractice action was brought. Finding that defendant could not show prejudice, the court ordered its indemnification of plaintiff. Under the circumstances, the court found no sound reason to extend
This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
- Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
- Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
- Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
The Article 8 Opt In
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
Role and Responsibilities of Practice Group Leaders
Ideally, the objective of defining the role and responsibilities of Practice Group Leaders should be to establish just enough structure and accountability within their respective practice group to maximize the economic potential of the firm, while institutionalizing the principles of leadership and teamwork.
Removing Restrictive Covenants In New York
In Rockwell v. Despart, the New York Supreme Court, Third Department, recently revisited a recurring question: When may a landowner seek judicial removal of a covenant restricting use of her land?