Tenth Circuit Affirms That Primary Insurer’s Insolvency Did Not Trigger Excess Insurer’s Obligation
Posted on Dec 4, 2015
An Oklahoma corporation distributed a drilling mud viscofier containing asbestos to the oilfield between 1966 and 1985. Thereafter, the corporation faced multiple personal injury suits based on asbestos exposure. Its primary insurer from 1975 to 1984, however, was declared insolvent by a New Hampshire court in 2003 before the insurer had paid out any claims for bodily injury on the corporation’s behalf. The corporation’s excess insurer then filed suit alleging it had no present duty to defend or indemnify the corporation in third-party personal injury actions arising from...
Continue Reading
OSHA Fine Increases Coming In 2016
Posted on Dec 3, 2015
Effective August 1, 2016, OSHA will increase fines. Following a one-time catch-up increase, the agency will then raise them on an annual basis to keep pace with the Consumer Price Index. The 2016 federal budget bill provided this directive. For more information about the likely impact, click here for an article by Kim Slowey on Construction Dive. In the article, Sutherland partner Lawrence Dany comments on what it means for the construction industry in particular.
Continue Reading
Indictments Issued Following 2012 Offshore Incident Alleging Safety Sacrificed For Speed
Posted on Nov 19, 2015
Earlier today, a federal grand jury indicted two companies and three individuals following a 2012 offshore incident that killed three workers. The charges range from involuntary manslaughter to charges involving violation of federal safety practices under the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act and the Clean Water Act. At the time of the incident, the well had been “shut in” and workers had returned to the platform to begin production work. The Justice Department alleges that the companies were unnecessarily speeding up their work at the expense of safety when performing the...
Continue Reading
Indemnity Provision Enforceable Where Offshore Contract Is Maritime In Nature
Posted on Nov 18, 2015
In a contractual indemnity dispute following an offshore worker’s injuries, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana confronted whether a the contract’s indemnity provision was enforceable. Specifically, the court had to determine whether the contract was governed by maritime law (making the indemnification provision enforceable) or whether it was governed by federal law by virtue of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (OCSLA), in which case federal law would adopt the law of the adjacent state, Louisiana, and thus the Louisiana Oilfield Indemnity Act...
Continue Reading
Expert Neurologist And Real Estate Broker’s Opinions Excluded In Manganese Contamination Case
Posted on Nov 10, 2015
In a case in which plaintiffs allege a steel mill’s slag processing operations have resulted in dangerous levels of manganese being released onto their property, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Ohio concluded yesterday that two of the plaintiffs’ proposed experts cannot testify. First, the plaintiffs’ expert neurologist intended to testify that persons who resided full time in the “class area” for a period of ten years or more will suffer harm to their health caused by chronic exposure to elevated levels of manganese. The court rejected...
Continue Reading
$2.5 Million Judgment Reversed In Pennsylvania Utility Pole Painter’s Case
Posted on Oct 30, 2015
An intermediate appellate court in Pennsylvania reversed a $2.49 million judgment in favor of a worker for injuries sustained after falling 40 feet while working as an employee of an independent contractor for a utility. The lower court judgment was against the utility, which appealed on the grounds that the trial court erred by not granting its motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict. The appellate court agreed with the utility because the worker failed to establish that the utility retained control over the manner, methods, and means of the work of the worker’s employer...
Continue Reading
Court Emphasizes OSHA Standards Have No Bearing In Consumer/Manufacturer Case
Posted on Oct 27, 2015
Last week, the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Virginia granted summary judgment to the manufacturer of a zero-turn radius lawnmower in a case brought by the estate of an individual killed when operating the mower in a roll over incident. The estate claimed that the mower was defectively designed without rollover protection (which was an optional safety feature that could be purchased at the time of sale when this mower was sold) and that the manufacturer failed to adequately warn of the danger. The estate argued that OSHA standards required a rollover protection system...
Continue Reading
FEATURED
The Crisis Response & Incident Investigation Team at Eversheds Sutherland has substantial experience in guiding companies through crises, big and small, in providing a coordinated response to help mitigate risk and liability. More>>