Panel Reverses Ruling In Favor Of Excess Insurer In Tainted Onions Coverage Suit

VENTURA, Calif. – There are issues of material fact regarding primary and excess insurers’ intent in entering into a tender agreement, a California appeals panel ruled Jan. 24, reversing a lower court’s orders in favor of the excess insurer in a dispute over $ 3.5 million that the primary insurer paid to settle a lawsuit arising from a deadly outbreak of hepatitis A caused by contaminated onions that were marketed by the wholesaler insured (National Fire Insurance Company of Hartford v. Great American Insurance Co., No. B225270, Calif. App., 2nd Dist., Div. 6).

View full post on LexisNexis® Mealey’s™ Daily Legal News

, , , , , , , , ,

Leave a Reply

XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Get Adobe Flash player
SEO Powered by Platinum SEO from Techblissonline
© 1992-2012 DC2NET™, Inc. All Rights Reserved