New Jersey Supreme Court Decision Reminds Policyholders To Make Timely Notice of Claims
Time 2 Minute Read
Categories: D&O

On February 11, 2016, New Jersey’s highest court held that National Union Fire Insurance Co. of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, (“National Union”) could refuse coverage for Templo Fuente De Vida Corp. and Fuente Properties Inc.’s settlement with policyholder First Independent Financial Group under a “claims-made” directors and officers policy because First Independent did not provide notice “as soon as practicable.”

National Union insured First Independent under a “claims made” policy, which provided coverage for claims made against the insured during the policy period.  The policy required that First Independent provide notice to National Union “as soon as practicable.”  However, First Independent did not notify National Union of Templo’s claims until six months after it first learned of them.  National Union subsequently denied coverage on the basis that it did not receive notice of the claims “as soon as practicable” as required under the policy.  In response, First Independent argued that National Union could deny coverage only if it could demonstrate prejudice as a result of the untimely notice.

The New Jersey Supreme Court agreed with National Union, finding that a showing of prejudice — which is often needed to disclaim coverage under an “occurrence-based” policy — is not required in order to avoid coverage under a “claims made” policy.  The court reasoned that the rule applying to policyholders under “occurrence-based” policies is intended to account for the relative lack of sophistication of policyholders who are unfamiliar with policy language.  The court found that First Independent, however, was a sophisticated insured and did not have a right to deviate from the clear terms under a “claims-made” policy.

In a recent Law360 article, NJ Justices Send ‘Warning Call’ To Insureds On Late Notice, Hunton & Williams Insurance Litigation Partner Walter J. Andrews comments on the decision.

Tags: AIG, Claims Made, National Union, New Jersey, Notice, Occurrence, Practicable, Prejudice
Print Email Twitter/X Linkedin Facebook

You May Also Be Interested In

Time 2 Minute Read
New Jersey Enacts New Restrictions on Health Care Facilities’ Use of Patient Data

On March 25, 2026, New Jersey enacted a new law restricting health care facilities’ collection and disclosure of certain patient information, including immigration status, citizenship status, place of birth, Social Security number and individual taxpayer identification number.

Continue Reading ›
Print Email Twitter/X Linkedin Facebook
Time 9 Minute Read
Buyer Beware: Analyzing New Jersey Court’s Ruling on Prior Knowledge Exclusions
By and

Businesses decide to switch liability insurers or obtain higher policy limits for various reasons. In doing so, policyholders should exercise caution to avoid future claim denials (or even policy recission) based on so-called “prior knowledge” issues. Prior knowledge comes into play when the policyholder knew about facts, incidents, or circumstances that occurred before the policy incepted, which can lead to problems if the insurer asserts that the policyholder had “prior knowledge” of an incident before seeking new coverage, limits, or policies.

Continue Reading ›
Print Email Twitter/X Linkedin Facebook
Time 4 Minute Read
Behind the Scenes Insurance Drama: Unraveling the Coverage Battle Around “It Ends With Us”
By and

While millions have been captivated by Wayfarer Studio’s production of “It Ends With Us,” a lesser-known but real-life insurance drama is unfolding off-screen. Last week, Harco National Insurance Company found itself in the spotlight when it filed a declaratory judgment action against its insureds, including, among others, Wayfarer Studios LLC, It Ends With Us Movie LLC and Justin Baldoni (jointly “Defendants”) asserting it has no obligation to defend the claims brought against Defendants by Blake Lively in Lively v. Wayfarer Studios, et al., U.S.D.C., S.D.N.Y. Case No. 1:24-cv-10049-LJL (the “Underlying Action”). 

Continue Reading ›
Print Email Twitter/X Linkedin Facebook
Time 4 Minute Read
Toy Story: Insurance Lessons from Mattel Defect Case
By and

A Delaware court recently held in Mattel, Inc. and Fisher Price, Inc. v. XL Insurance America, Inc., et al., that a series of product liability claims dating back to 2013 constituted a single “occurrence” under the toy manufacturer’s and distributor’s commercial general liability (CGL) policies.

The case stemmed from Mattel’s request for defense and indemnity coverage in response to claims that certain toys caused bodily injuries to infants. The CGL coverage tower, which included policies issued by multiple primary, excess, and umbrella insurers, spanned from 2011 to 2020.

Continue Reading ›
Print Email Twitter/X Linkedin Facebook

Search

Subscribe Arrow

Recent Posts

Categories

Tags

Authors

Archives

Jump to Page