notice requirements

Owatonna Clinic — Mayo Health System v. Medical Protective Co. of Fort Wayne, Indiana

Owatonna Clinic — Mayo Health System sued Medical Protective Company, its medical malpractice insurer, for refusing to defend and indemnify it in a malpractice suit. Medical Protective’s defense was that Owatonna had not complied with the insurance policy’s notice requirements. The United States District Court for the District of Minnesota ruled in favor of Owatonna Clinic, and Medical Protective appealed.

A claims-made policy, the clinic’s malpractice policy covered only claims submitted during the policy period. [click to continue…]

Digg This
Reddit This
Stumble Now!
Share on Facebook
Bookmark this on Delicious
Share on LinkedIn
Post on Twitter

{ 0 comments }

Safety National Casualty Corp. v. Austin Resolutions, Inc.

Safety National Casualty Corporation (“Safety National”) engaged Austin Resolutions, Inc. (“Austin”) to negotiate savings on bills from a hospital. The bills were Safety National’s responsibility by virtue of a claim against an excess workers’ compensation policy Safety National had issued. Under the oral agreement between Safety National and Austin, Austin was to be paid 25% of any savings it negotiated.

The claim under Safety National’s excess liability policy arose out of serious injuries sustained by an employee of Safety National’s insured in a car accident while on the job. [click to continue…]

Digg This
Reddit This
Stumble Now!
Share on Facebook
Bookmark this on Delicious
Share on LinkedIn
Post on Twitter

{ 0 comments }