Five Important Lessons on North Carolina Insurance Law from New NCG, Inc., Part 2
By Cal Adams
Previously, we explained in Part 1, the facts behind New NGC, Inc. v. ACE American Insurance Co.,
et. al, 3:10-CV-00022-RLV-DSC, 2015 WL 2259172 (W.D.N.C. May 13, 2015), as
well as its application of West
American Insurance Co., Plaintiff, v. Tufco Flooring East, Inc., 409 S.E.2d
692 (N.C. App. 1991) and how coverage in a putative class action can be driven by
unnamed class plaintiffs and is not limited exclusively to the named class
representative.
The third major takeaway from New
NGC is that while insurance companies often argue that their duty to defend
is determined by the allegations in the Complaint, the North Carolina Supreme
Court has stated unequivocally that an insurer’s duty to defend may still be
found where the insurer “knows or could reasonably ascertain facts, that if
proven, would be covered by the policy.” Waste
Management of the Carolinas, Inc. v. Peerless Ins. Co., 340 S.E.2d at 374,
379 (N.C. 1986). However, while the inverse of this proposition has not been
addressed by the North Carolina state courts, it has been explicitly rejected
by the Middle District of North Carolina in a decision in the Fourth Circuit
Court of Appeals in St. Paul Fire and
Marine Insurance Co. vs. Vigilant Insurance Company, 724 F.Supp. 1173, 1179
(M.D.N.C. 1989), aff’d. 919 F.2d 235 (4th Cir. 1990). In other words, the North
Carolina courts will in all likelihood refuse to allow evidence outside the
pleadings to negate allegations in the Complaint.
Fourth, the duty to defend only arises when the insurance company
receives actual notice of the underlying action.
Fifth, a policyholder does not have to provide “specific citations to
insurance policies and years of coverage for tender of notice to be proper as
to the underlying claims” absent an express requirement in the policy.
Memorandum and Order at 26. Instead, once notice of an underlying action is
provided, it is up to the insurance company “to review the underlying suits and
determine what obligations it may owe to [the policyholder]” under any and all
actual policies issued by the [insurance company], whether cited by [the
policyholder] or not.” Memorandum and Order at 26.
If you have questions about the scope of the duty to defend in North
Carolina, please let us know.
Labels: duty to defend, insurance litigation
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home