Abstracts - faqs.org

Abstracts

Law

Search abstracts:
Abstracts » Law

Dismissing insurance coverage actions in federal court for want of supplemental subject matter jurisdiction

Article Abstract:

Third party actions involving insurance coverage that are brought to the federal level through the use of diversity jurisdiction arguments should be dismissed and sent back to state courts. Most such actions involve environmental claims, but the bottom line tends to be the coverage of the insurance, not the environmental issue itself. The supplemental subject matter litigation that usually ensues is a waste of resources for the parties involved and the justice system.

Author: Howard, David J.
Publisher: Federation of Defense and Corporate Counsel
Publication Name: Federation of Insurance & Corporate Counsel Quarterly
Subject: Law
ISSN: 0887-0942
Year: 1995
United States, Laws, regulations and rules, Federal jurisdiction, Diversity jurisdiction

User Contributions:

Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:

CAPTCHA


Homeowners in the workplace: are their torts covered? The business pursuits exclusion

Article Abstract:

Homeowner's insurance and excess liability policies generally include an exclusion of coverage for tortious acts occurring during business pursuits, but the various interpretations of the phrase 'business pursuits' suggests that policy drafters need to be very specific in drafting the exclusion. A number of cases involving the business pursuit exclusion and different standards applied by different courts are discussed.

Author: Allen, T. Eugene, III, Duggan, I. Rose
Publisher: Federation of Defense and Corporate Counsel
Publication Name: Federation of Insurance & Corporate Counsel Quarterly
Subject: Law
ISSN: 0887-0942
Year: 1995
Cases, Insurance industry, Homeowners' insurance

User Contributions:

Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:

CAPTCHA


Annuity cost: relevant evidence of present value in personal injury actions

Article Abstract:

States should enact laws allowing insurance companies to pay future medical costs in personal injury actions in the form of an annuity. Doing so would prevent the use of large lump-sum payments that often go to the heirs of the victim instead of being used to pay medical bills. The use of an annuity would also insure that the victim is not undercompensated.

Author: Simonson, John
Publisher: Federation of Defense and Corporate Counsel
Publication Name: Federation of Insurance & Corporate Counsel Quarterly
Subject: Law
ISSN: 0887-0942
Year: 1996
Remedies, California, Personal injuries, Valuation, Lost earnings damages

User Contributions:

Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:

CAPTCHA


Subjects list: Interpretation and construction, Insurance law, states
Similar abstracts:
  • Abstracts: Designing deferred compensation plans for tax-exempt and governmental employers
  • Abstracts: Mixing tools against proliferation: The EU's strategy for dealing with weapons of mass destruction. The SICAR: a new Luxembourg vehicle for private equity and venture capital investments
  • Abstracts: Rising inflation casts shadow over pay talks. Settlements trail inflation
  • Abstracts: Bingaman's antitrust era: the division's intensified enforcement and internalization agenda. Sense and nonsense on the minimum wage
  • Abstracts: Wide pay variations emerging. First hint of pay movement
This website is not affiliated with document authors or copyright owners. This page is provided for informational purposes only. Unintentional errors are possible.
Some parts © 2025 Advameg, Inc.