The Masonic Temple Association of Quincy v. Acadia Ins. Co.
Year: 2021
Court: Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Case Number: SJC-13109
Issue:
  • Policy Interpretation
State:
  • Massachusetts

In its brief, UP explores the issue of whether the named insured in a general liability insurance policy includes a “doing business as” designation, whether policy coverage is limited to liabilities arising out of the “doing business as” entity’s business or whether it applies to the…
CLMS Management Services LP, et. al. v. Amwins Brokerage of Georgia LLC, et al.
Year: 2020
Court: United States Court of Appeals Ninth Circuit
Case Number: 20-35428
Issue:
  • Arbitration
State:
  • Washington

In it brief, UP urges the Court to follow the Second Circuits lead in enforcing state anti-arbitration laws against foreign insurers just as they are enforceable against domestic insurers. As current Washington state law and Federal law (McCarran-Ferguson Act) stands, state anti-arbitration laws supersede acts…
Treasure Cay Condominium Assoc., Inc. v. Frontline Unlimited Ins. Co.
Year: 2021
Court: United States Court of Appeals Eleventh Circuit
Case Number: 21-10611-E
Issue:
  • Appraisal
State:
  • Florida

In its brief, UP discusses the purpose of appraisal and why the District Court erred in granting summary judgment to the insurer. UP suggests that the Court erred in holding that Treasure Cay’s demand for appraisal was premature, and that the purpose of appraisal is to…
Neuro-Communication Services, Inc. v. The Cincinnati Insurance Co. et. al.
Year: 2021
Court: The Supreme Court of Ohio
Case Number: 2021-0130
Issue:
  • COVID-19
State:
  • Ohio

In its brief, UP tackles the issue of COVID-19 in support of Neuro-Communication Services, Inc. UP argues that businesses that were habitable and safe for their ordinary and intended use one day now have become unsafe for their ordinary and intended use due to the infiltration of COVID-19…
Indiana Repertory Theatre v. The Cincinnati Casualty Co.
Year: 2022
Court: Indiana Court of Appeals and Indiana Supreme Court
Case Number: 21A-PL-00628 and 21A-CP-02848
Issue:
  • COVID-19
State:
  • Indiana

In its three amicus curiae briefs, UP supports coverage for an insured’s business interruption losses related to the SARS-CoV-2 virus and COVID-19. Among other things, UP analyzes the relevance of an absence of a virus exclusion in the policies at issue and argues that decades of case…
Outwest Restaurant Group, Inc. v. Affiliated FM Inc. Co.
Year: 2021
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Case Number: 21-15585
Issue:
  • COVID-19
State:
  • California

In its brief, UP sets out to clarify the flawed legal arguments that were set forth by the magistrate judge at the trial court level in this case. The magistrate judge concluded that this insuring agreement requires “a physical change in the condition or a permanent dispossession of…
Westfield Area YMCA et.al. v. The North River Insurance Co. et. al.
Year: 2021
Court: Superior Court of New Jersey
Case Number: UNN-L-2584-20
Issue:
  • COVID-19
  • Regulatory Estoppel
State:
  • New Jersey

In its brief, UP petitions  the court to allow its appearance as amicus curiae on behalf of the Westfield Area YMCA. The question presented in this case is whether regulatory estoppel should preclude enforcement of the virus and bacteria exclusions in light of those known…
Town Kitchen, LLC v. Lloyd’s London
Year: 2021
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
Case Number: 21-10992-CC
Issue:
  • COVID-19
State:
  • Florida

In its brief, UP tackles the issue of COVID-19 as it relates to the dismissal, at the trial court level, of Town Kitchen’s compliant against Lloyd’s London. UP argues the District Court relied on precedent in other jurisdictions and placed undue reliance on the Mama…
Alpert v. Nationstar Mortgage LLC., et. al.
Year: 2021
Court: Supreme Court of Washington
Case Number: 99377-7
Issue:
  • Filed Rate Doctrine
State:
  • Washington

In its brief, UP explores the filed rate doctrines effect on illegal insurance practices. The filed rate doctrine potentially upholds illegal practices, such as mortgage kickbacks, unjust enrichment and racketeering by barring claims against insurers for insurance rates that have been previously approved by state…
Legal Sea Foods, LLC. v. Strathmore Ins. Co.
Year: 2021
Court: United States Circuit if Appeals fir the First Circuit
Case Number: 21-1202
Issue:
  • COVID-19
State:
  • Massachusetts

In its brief, UP weighs in on a COVID-19 matter for Legal Sea Foods whose business interruption policy did not include a virus exclusion. UP argues that the lower court in this case erred when it states the COVID-19 virus does not impact the structural…
Dakota Girls, LLC et.al., v. Philadelphia Indemnity Ins. Co.
Year: 2021
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
Case Number: 21-3245
Issue:
  • COVID-19
State:
  • Ohio

In its brief, UP tackle a COVID-19 business interruption claim on behalf of Dakota Girls. Philadelphia IIC promised to insure business income if Dakota Girls suffered “physical loss of or damage to” its property. We argue that the disjunctive “or” shows that there are two bases for coverage:…
American Capital v. Leeward Bay
Year: 2021
Court: Supreme Court Florida
Case Number: SC20-1766
Issue:
  • Appraisal
State:
  • Florida

In its brief, UP tackles the issue of appraisal provisions that are placed in policies to resolve disputes over the amount of loss. Traditionally, nothing in the policy dictates that issues of coverage must be determined prior to appraisal. However, American Capital’s policy, and most modern…
Sandy Point Dental, P.C., v. The Cincinnati Ins. Co., Inc.
Year: 2021
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
Case Number: 21-1186
Issue:
  • COVID-19
State:
  • Illinois

In its brief, UP weighs in on the uncontrolled spread of SARS-COV-2 (“coronavirus”) throughout Illinois. We argue that COVID, like a spreading wildfire, constitutes a natural disaster that insurance should cover. Businesses that were habitable and safe for their ordinary and intended use one day…
The Inns By The Sea v. California Mutual Insurance Co.
Year: 2021
Court: Court of Appeal of the State of California Sixth Appellate District
Case Number: H048443
Issue:
  • COVID-19
State:
  • California

In its brief, UP writes in support of Inns’ appeal to provide further context to this Court regarding: (1) why the insurance term “direct physical loss of or damage to” property does not require a showing of “physical alteration” to real property; (2) how the…
Santo’s Italian Cafe v. Acuity
Year: 2021
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
Case Number: 21-3068
Issue:
  • COVID-19
State:
  • Ohio

In its brief, UP combats Acuity’s argument that in order to trigger coverage, there must be a “tangible alteration” of the business. UP does not share that view and urges the court to broaden the meaning of physical loss to include damage that renders property…
RTG Furniture v. Aspen
Year: 2021
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
Case Number: 21-10490
Issue:
  • COVID-19
State:
  • Florida

In its brief, UP tackles the topic of COVID-19. In the argument’s summary, UP states that the district court erred in holding “direct physical loss of or damage to” has only one meaning–“tangible injury to property”– because in doing so the district court: (1) ignored…
TJBC, Inc. v. The Cincinnati Ins. Co. Inc.
Year: 2021
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
Case Number: 21-1203
Issue:
  • COVID-19
State:
  • Illinois

In its brief, UP breaks down the meaning of property in the context of COVID-19. In ascertaining the meaning of the phrase “direct physical accidental loss or damage” to property, it is critical not to minimize the significance and legal import of the word “property.” At…
Mac Property Group, LLC v. Selective Ins. Co.
Year: 2021
Court: New Jersey Appellate Division
Case Number: L-002629-20
Issue:
  • COVID-19
State:
  • New Jersey

In its brief, UP tackles the issue COVID-19 has posed to businesses. The present case is neither theoretical nor without significant consequences to the multitude of New Jersey businesses impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic.  Indeed, this Court’s decision is likely to affect businesses throughout this State…