California Supreme Court Dubs Notice-Prejudice Rule a Fundamental Public Policy of the State
Knowledge

California Supreme Court Dubs Notice-Prejudice Rule a Fundamental Public Policy of the State

Steve P. Nassi and Landon J. Green, members of the firm’s Global Insurance Services and Commercial Litigation and Arbitration groups, wrote an article for the New York Law Journal discussing the California Supreme Court’s opinion regarding the state’s notice-prejudice rule.

In “California Supreme Court Dubs Notice-Prejudice Rule a Fundamental Public Policy of the State,” Steve and Landon talk about the potential impact of the court’s decision on the insurance industry and offer counsel to underwriters, claims handlers, and coverage counsel.

“The notice-prejudice rule generally requires the insurer to prove that it has been prejudiced before disclaiming coverage on late notice grounds. The consent provision or “no voluntary payment provision” prohibits an insured from settling a claim or incurring non-emergency expenses for which it will seek coverage without the prior consent of its insurer. This article will analyze the court’s answers to these questions, discuss the potential impact of the court’s decision on the insurance industry at large, and offer guidance to underwriters, claims handlers, and coverage counsel in the wake of this decision.”

 

Read the full article here:

California Supreme Court Dubs Notice-Prejudice Rule a Fundamental Public Policy of the State,” New York Law Journal, January 15, 2020

More about Goldberg Segalla’s Steven P. Nassi and Landon J. Greene:

Steven P. Nassi focuses his practice on assisting domestic and international insurers with complex coverage issues, risk-management, and the defense of extra-contractual claims. He handles a variety of first-party insurance claims, including the investigation and defense of claims involving fraud and other types of misconduct, often during the investigative and adjustment phase of the claims process.

Landon J. Greene focuses his practice on representing regional, national, and global insurers in a variety of complex coverage disputes relating to personal, commercial, umbrella, and reinsurance policies, as well as defending bad faith claims. He draws on experience working for a multinational investment bank and financial services corporation, where he provided regulatory advice on corporate compliance matters.