The court found that the insured hair salon and barbershop plausibly alleged an entitlement to coverage for lost business income when the government orders restricted use of the property as intended. Seifert v. IMT Ins. Co., 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 103420 (D. Minn. June 2, 2021).

Plaintiff's business was ordered to close by two executive orders issued in response to the growing number of COVID-19 cases in Minnesota. The policy covered the loss of business income due to a "suspension of your 'operations' . . . caused by direct physical loss of or damage to property . . ." Plaintiff sought coverage for his business losses. IMT Insurance Company denied the claim. Plaintiff sued and IMT moved to dismiss. The motion was initially granted without prejudice and plaintiff filed an amended complaint.

Having recently marked the one-year anniversary of the COVID-19 pandemic, it seems like an opportune time to consider how the pandemic has impacted the insurance industry. While business interruption (BI) lawsuits (totaling more than 1,500 as of March 31, 2021) have dominated the headlines, the pandemic’s effects stretch far beyond BI claims. Indeed, the pandemic has impacted virtually all aspects of the industry and those impacts will likely alter the insurance landscape for years to come.

Reprinted courtesy of Gregory S. Capps, White and Williams LLP and Daryn E. Rush, White and Williams LLP

Mr. Capps may be contacted at cappsg@whiteandwilliams.com
Mr. Rush may be contacted at rushd@whiteandwilliams.com

Workplace injuries on construction sites are common occurrences. For large projects that span multiple years with deca-million dollar budgets, even contractors with the best safety practices can expect dozens of injuries and related incidents to be reported in a given year. Many more incidents will go unreported, either because the incident is not deemed significant enough, or for other reasons, including the immigration status of the injured.

Reprinted courtesy of Steven Gonzalez & Aaron Cohn, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved.

Mr. Gonzalez may be contacted at sgonzalez@wwhgd.com
Mr. Cohn may be contacted at acohn@wwhgd.com

In another victory for policy holders on business interruption claims arising from COVID-19, the federal district court denied the insurer's motion to dismiss on one of two claims. Kingray Inc. v. Farmers Group Inc., et al., 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 41300 (C. D. Cal. March 4, 2021).

Plaintiff Kingray Inc., who operated a sports bar and grill, and Plaintiff Nora's Style Salon, Inc. filed suit against Farmers when business interruption coverage was denied under plaintiffs' all risk policies. Government shut-down orders at the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic caused plaintiffs to suffer loss of business income.

After years of going full-throttle, the U.S. construction industry has been contending with various pandemic-induced bumps in the road that will continue to slow business down and challenge how much resiliency can be mustered for the recovery ahead.

It’s a tough environment to deal with. While there was room for caution after eight booming years in construction spending, the pandemic’s massive disruption has altered the economics of working safely, on time and on budget. The aftereffects are carrying into 2021 as the recovery begins.

Reprinted courtesy of Kirk Chamberlain & Craig Tappel, Construction Executive, a publication of Associated Builders and Contractors. All rights reserved.

The Federal Emergency Management Agency on Friday unveiled the details of an overhaul to its beleaguered National Flood Insurance Program, the initiative’s first major update in 50 years. Most homeowners in the program will have lower or stable premiums, but roughly 11% of homes—largely the highest value ones—will see increases in premiums of at least $10 a month. Those could continue to rise until they reach a cap of $12,000 a year.

One year ago, when the COVID-19 pandemic ground the world to a halt, our firm’s virtual offices were inundated with calls from policyholders, asking if their current and projected losses due to the pandemic would be covered by insurance. While the outlook wasn’t great, we made a few predictions about where coverage might be found, how we expected coverage to ultimately be decided, and instructed clients how to make and protect their COVID-related claims for coverage.

One year later, it’s instructive to look at how these predictions played out, and what we’ve learned so far. These insights will help policyholders more intelligently decide whether to pursue coverage for losses sustained because of the pandemic.

Emerald Holding, Inc. v. W.R. Berkley Syndicate Limited and Great Lakes Insurance SE US District Court – Central District of CA; Case No. 8:21-CV-00340

Emerald Holding Inc. (“Emerald”), a leading operator of business-to-business trade show events across the United States, has suffered millions of dollars in losses from canceled or postponed in-person events in order to comply with health and safety government mandates due to the Coronavirus pandemic.

Reprinted courtesy of Jeffrey J. Vita, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C. and Stephanie A. Giagnorio, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C.

Mr. Vita may be contacted at jvita@sdvlaw.com
Ms. Giagnorio may be contacted at SGiagnorio@sdvlaw.com

Society Insurance Company unsuccessfully sought to dismiss plaintiff restaurant group's claims for business interruption after shut-down orders followed the onset of COVID-19. In re Soc'y Ins. Co. COVID-19 Business Interruption Protection Insurance Litigation, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 32351 (N.D. Ill Feb. 22, 2021).

The multi-district litigation addressed Society Insurance's denial of business- interruption coverage for several restaurants based in several states whose operations were impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic Society sought dismissal of three cases.

A California state court denied an insurer’s motion to dismiss Goodwill Industries of Orange County’s COVID-19 business-interruption claim after an apparent reassessment of how California’s federal courts have applied (or, rather, misapplied) California precedent to COVID-19 cases. The case is Goodwill Industries of Orange County, California v. Philadelphia Indemnity Insurance Co., No. 30-2020-01169032-CU-IC-CXC (Cal. Super. Ct. Jan. 28, 2021).

Reprinted courtesy of Lorelie S. Masters, Hunton Andrews Kurth and Rachel E. Hudgins, Hunton Andrews Kurth

Ms. Masters may be contacted at lmasters@HuntonAK.com
Ms. Hudgins may be contacted at rhudgins@HuntonAK.com

As previously reported, an Oklahoma state court recently granted summary judgment to the Cherokee Nation for its COVID-19 business interruption claim. The court has now issued a more substantive opinion, establishing the merits of the Cherokee Nation’s claim and providing yet another blueprintfor policyholders seeking to recover COVID-19-related losses under “all risk” commercial property insurance policies.

Reprinted courtesy of Sergio F. Oehninger, Hunton Andrews Kurth and Geoffrey B. Fehling, Hunton Andrews Kurth
Mr. Oehninger may be contacted at soehninger@HuntonAK.com
Mr. Fehling may be contacted at gfehling@HuntonAK.com