Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Once a policyholder tenders a claim, an insurer is likely to request information and documentation from that policyholder about the underlying event, circumstance, occurrence or claim. The insured, however, may have legitimate concerns that sharing such information could result in the inadvertent waiver of evidentiary privileges and protections as to the insurer and third parties, or an adverse coverage determination. We discuss herein how insurers and insureds should approach information sharing under various scenarios.
The tender of an insurance claim often triggers an immediate, long-lasting tug of war between an insurer and an insurance policyholder (“insured”). At issue is access to information. In response to the tender, the insurer will often request extensive amounts of information and documentation. The insured, however, will face conflicting incentives. On the one hand, if the insurer ultimately agrees that coverage exists, then their interests should align, and information sharing will promote strategic decision-making. If, on the other hand, the insurer later denies coverage, then it could use the information it receives from the insured to defeat coverage in a subsequent declaratory relief action. Moreover, an insured may have legitimate concerns about sharing privileged or confidential information with the insurer, lest the insured later be deemed to have waived protections against disclosure of that information to third parties. Courts have addressed information-sharing disputes between insureds and insurers in a variety of postures. This article discusses these disputes at a high level to glean lessons for both insurers and policyholders.
The DOJ's Criminal Division issued three declinations since the issuance of the revised CEP a year ago. Review of these cases gives insight into DOJ's implementation of the new policy in practice.
This article discusses the practical and policy reasons for the use of DPAs and NPAs in white-collar criminal investigations, and considers the NDAA's new reporting provision and its relationship with other efforts to enhance transparency in DOJ decision-making.
When we consider how the use of AI affects legal PR and communications, we have to look at it as an industrywide global phenomenon. A recent online conference provided an overview of the latest AI trends in public relations, and specifically, the impact of AI on communications. Here are some of the key points and takeaways from several of the speakers, who provided current best practices, tips, concerns and case studies.
The parameters set forth in the DOJ's memorandum have implications not only for the government's evaluation of compliance programs in the context of criminal charging decisions, but also for how defense counsel structure their conference-room advocacy seeking declinations or lesser sanctions in both criminal and civil investigations.