COVID coverage cases conflict with insurer’s documentation

By Peter Porzellanburger, Jeffrey Stempel, and Erik Knutsen (May 24, 2022 at 6:25 p.m. EDT) – The recent federal court certification of the COVID-19 coverage case Tapestry Inc. v. Factory Mutual Insurance Company in the Maryland Court of Appeals offers more than a welcome respite from Federal Court resistance to obtaining authoritative state court decisions on a state-law controlled issue of first impressions, but also an opportunity to look beyond the text of applicable insurance policies to determine the scope of business interruption coverage that insurers provide to their customers.[1]

To date, coverage decisions on this issue have not only been one-sided in terms of insurers’ achievements, but also surprisingly superficial, failing to appreciate the breadth and ambiguity of the policy…

Stay ahead of the curve

In the legal profession, information is the key to success. You need to know what’s happening with customers, competitors, operations, and industries. Law360 provides the intelligence you need to remain an expert and beat the competition.

  • Access to case data in articles (numbers, files, courts, type of action and more.)
  • Access to attached documents such as briefs, petitions, complaints, decisions, motions, etc.
  • Create custom alerts for specific article and case topics, and more!



Comments are closed.