Topic
Every decision we've filed under Insurance.
The Eleventh Circuit affirmed the district court's denial of a pro se plaintiff's motions for reconsideration regarding a summary judgment in an insurance dispute. The appellate court held that the motions were untimely and failed to present newly discovered evidence or manifest errors of law.
The Fifth Circuit affirmed a district court's amended judgment confirming four arbitration awards in a medical insurance dispute. The court held that the district court did not violate the mandate from a prior appeal by entering judgment before a subsequent arbitration resolved inconsistencies among the awards.
The Ninth Circuit reversed a district court's grant of summary judgment in a dispute over life insurance policy premiums. The appellate court held that the policy language was ambiguous and must be construed in favor of the insureds under Alaska law.
The Ninth Circuit reversed in part and affirmed in part a district court order regarding an insurance dispute. The court found a genuine dispute of material fact existed concerning whether the insurer was prejudiced by late notice.
The Fifth Circuit affirmed the district court's grant of summary judgment because the plaintiff lacked contractual standing to sue under the insurance policies. However, the court vacated the denial of the motion to amend and remanded the case to allow the addition of new plaintiffs who may have standing.
The Fifth Circuit affirmed a district court ruling that an insurance policy did not cover a fatal car accident involving a high school basketball team. The court held that a school email asking parents to coordinate rides did not constitute a formal request for parents to drive their own children.
The Fifth Circuit vacated a district court judgment that dismissed a plaintiff's personal injury claims with prejudice. The appellate court held that the dismissal was improper because the plaintiff lacked contumacious conduct and was denied a chance to amend her complaint.
The Eleventh Circuit vacated a summary judgment ruling that denied an insurance claim for hurricane-prevention expenses. The court held that while the policy covered the costs of removing and reinstalling railroad gates, the applicable deductible was fixed at seven hundred fifty thousand dollars rather than a percentage of total property value.
The United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit certified two questions of Ohio law to the Supreme Court of Ohio regarding the voluntary-payment defense in consumer lending disputes. The court addressed whether a bank could bar recovery for breach of contract when customers paid a flat fee while unaware of the actual annual percentage rate.
The United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit certified two questions of Ohio law to the Supreme Court of Ohio regarding the voluntary-payment defense in consumer lending disputes. The court determined that existing state precedents are too unsettled to allow a federal court to guess how the defense applies to contracts with conflicting price terms.