In the ensuing coverage litigation, the insured filed a Motion For Choice Of Law Determination, and contended that Florida law governed its policy (a “fact intensive” inquiry). Twin City’s underwriter responded, from his office in New York, with an email stating: “we are pleased to provide you with the following Binder For Insurance” and attaching a binder. ![]() To renew the excess policy, the insured’s broker emailed Twin City’s underwriter: “please consider this email as the formal order to bind coverage for Sun Capital’s renewal GPL coverage.” Id. In Sun Capital, the insured renewed a primary Professional Liability policy from Houston Casualty Company, and a follow-form excess policy from Twin City Fire Insurance Company. ![]() The Southern District of Florida recently issued an opinion that addresses some rarely discussed nuances of insurance choice of law disputes.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |