Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
<i>In the Spotlight:</i> The Diminishing Value of Depreciation Defenses
Although the value of a third-party liability insurance claim often can be determined in a straightforward way by simply adding the amount of a judgment or settlement to the costs of defending the claim, the amount of a first-party insurance claim ' for example, a property claim ' may be subject to varying valuation approaches. These varying approaches often will depend upon whether the policyholder repairs or replaces the damaged property, and the range of valuation options will be established by the policy language, as that language has been or should be construed under the law of the applicable jurisdiction.
Parties may agree upon the history of a claim and the provisions of the policy that will control, but a valuation dispute nonetheless may arise. Sometimes a dispute will occur because the policy language at issue may be susceptible to differing interpretations. A dispute may also arise because the insurer argues for an underwriting intent that does not appear evident in the language of its policy or because, in the insurer's view, the policyholder will enjoy a windfall if the policy language is enforced as written. Regardless of the reason, such disputes are fairly common. An examination of cases in a few jurisdictions will provide some insight into the issues these disputes present, and may provide some basis for predicting their outcomes. In addition, such an examination may offer insight into the benefits of avoiding such disputes.
If a policyholder does not repair or replace damaged property, or if a policyholder has not purchased a policy that would cover the full costs to repair or replace, insurers often will be required to pay only a reduced amount determined through application of some depreciation approach. While depreciation arguments may be valid and have proven successful for insurers in many cases, it is important to remember that depreciation is not a wild card. Depreciation is not always applicable to property losses and, even when applicable, it may not apply in the manner the insurer advocates.
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
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.
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.
Legal Possession: What Does It Mean?
Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.
The Anti-Assignment Override Provisions
UCC Sections 9406(d) and 9408(a) are one of the most powerful, yet least understood, sections of the Uniform Commercial Code. On their face, they appear to override anti-assignment provisions in agreements that would limit the grant of a security interest. But do these sections really work?