Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
NJ Supreme Court Decision Defines the Parameters of Acceptable Precedent in Bad-Faith Claims
For insurance attorneys and carriers alike, the decision to disclaim coverage is an invitation to enter delicate and uncertain legal territory, situated firmly between a rock and a hard place. On one side of the scale lies the potential contractual obligation to defend or indemnify the insured. On the other is the prudency of avoiding coverage obligations that were never bargained for. The crux of this dilemma arises from the insurer's heightened duty of good faith.
Implicitly written into every insurance contact by operation of law is the obligation to investigate claims with the utmost honestly and sincerity. This obligation runs deep, as reflected by the fact that unlike a typical contract, a showing that an insurer breached its contractual duty of good faith does not always necessarily require a showing of any malice or ill will. Rather, simple proof that the insurer violated its fiduciary obligations to its insured may often be sufficient to make a bad-faith claim. In that regard, nearly every jurisdiction has affixed a “fairly debatable” standard of proof to insurance bad-faith claims.
Under this standard, there must exist some reasonably ascertainable cause for belief that the disputed claim is not covered. If the decision to disclaim coverage is not determined to be a “fairly debatable” one, then the insurer may find itself liable in a tort action for bad faith. Accompanying bad-faith liability is a litany of potential costs, from counsel fees to consequential damages.
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?