WDNY Follows Other New York Courts Holding That COVID-19 Losses Are Not Covered
The insured operated a martial arts and fitness business in Buffalo, New York, that sustained losses in revenue when its business closed due to the COVID-19 pandemic and related executive orders. The insured sought coverage under its commercial property policy. The United States District Court for the Western District of New York held that the insured’s allegations that the virus became widespread and governmental orders led to business closures by sharply reducing occupancy fell short of the requirements of a “direct physical loss or damage” to the insured premises to trigger the business income coverage. As to the insured’s claim for civil authority coverage, the court sympathized about the devastating impact of the pandemic on businesses, but held that the insured had not “provide[d] specific, non-general allegations that document a direct physical injury to property (not theirs) that
Illinois Specialty Insurer, RLI, Makes Leadership Promotions, Changes March 8, 2021
Peoria, Illinois-based specialty insurer serving niche property, casualty and surety markets, RLI Corp., has promoted or named several leaders to new roles.
Kevin Horwitz, vice president, Claim, has assumed the role of vice president, Innovation Management and Policy Development, a newly created position. Horwitz is responsible for identifying, evaluating and supporting emerging product, policy, InsurTech and innovation opportunities. Horwitz joined RLI in 2010 as manager, Claim, and held several Claim leadership roles before being promoted to vice president, Claim in 2015. Prior to joining RLI, he served as claim consultant at CNA. Horwitz has 20 years of industry experience.
Maryland’s highest court adopts pro rata allocation for asbestos-related bodily injury claims under liability policies. The court began by explaining that injury spanning many years often implicates multiple policies and, therefore, implicates a continuous or injury-in-fact trigger under Maryland law. Adopting the reasoning of
Mayor & City Council of Baltimore v. Utica Mutual Ins. Co., 802 A.2d 1070 (Md. Ct. Spec. App. 2002)
, app. dismissed, 821 A.2d 369 (Md. 2003), it rejected joint and several allocation because of its “poor fit” under the policy language:
[T]he pro rata approach is unmistakably consistent with the language of standard CGL policies. Indeed, “there is no logic to support the notion that one single insurance policy among 20 or 30 years worth of policies could be expected to be held liable for the entire time period.” …Consistent with the policy language limiting coverage to that which occurs “during the policy period,” the timing of the injury di