New York s Second Department Splits From First Department - Insurance mondaq.com - get the latest breaking news, showbiz & celebrity photos, sport news & rumours, viral videos and top stories from mondaq.com Daily Mail and Mail on Sunday newspapers.
Second metallizer line expected to be commercialized in Q3 FY22Max Ventures & Industries (MaxVIL), subsidiary Max Speciality
Films (MSFL), which manufactures specialty packaging films had announced in December 2020 that company will be installing two additional metallizer lines. MSFL has commenced first of the two
metallizer lines today, 20 April 2021.
These two additional metallizer lines were planned as a part of MSFL s strategy to continue to embark on its specialty journey. Planned with a total capex of Rs. 60 crore for two lines (Rs. 30 crore for each),
these metallizer lines will enable MSFL to enhance its value-added specialty product portfolio. This is in line with its focus since the last few years to co-create packaging films innovations in consultation
To embed, copy and paste the code into your website or blog:
Recoupment of defense costs (defense fees and costs) by insurers in the absence of a duty to indemnify under a liability policy is an unsettled issue in many states. In a
recent decision, a New York intermediate appellate court held that even though there was no duty to indemnify an underlying personal injury action under a CGL policy, the insurer could
not recoup the defense costs it had advanced under a reservation of rights (ROR) letter where the policy at issue provided for a duty to defend but did not contain an express contractual provision allowing for the recoupment of such defense costs. This decision, however, by a court for one of four judicial departments in New York, is contrary to other state and federal decisions allowing recoupment under New York law and should be limited to its facts.
N.Y. Court Takes Contrary Position on Insurers’ Right to Recoup Defense Costs By Eric Stern and Andrew Lipkowitz | January 21, 2021
It has long been understood that under New York law, an insurance company may recoup defense costs paid on behalf of an insured once it has been ultimately determined that there was no coverage in connection with the underlying action, provided that the insurer reserved its rights to seek such reimbursement.
Multiple New York courts at both the trial and Appellate Division levels (New York’s intermediate appellate court), have adopted such a rule. However, a recent decision by the Appellate Division, Second Department in