April 08, 2022 | New York Law Journal
Insurer's Potential Liability for Prejudgment Interest in Excess of Policy LimitThe type of prejudgment interest involved (and the terms of the policy, if interest is part of the underlying claim) will determine whether the insurer is liable for such interest in excess of the policy limits even in the absence of bad faith.
By Jeffrey G. Steinberg and Benjamin Zelermyer
4 minute read
March 14, 2017 | New York Law Journal
Special Interrogatories in Coverage Disputes: How to Pop the QuestionBenjamin Zelermyer and Jeffrey G. Steinberg write that neither a plaintiff nor an insured defendant may be eager to ask the trial court to submit special questions to the jury, prefering to leave the basis of a potential verdict for the plaintiff uncertain, placing the burden on the insurer. However, despite the obvious utility of special interrogatories, insurers rarely move to intervene and courts in New York often refuse to permit intervention.
By Benjamin Zelermyer and Jeffrey G. Steinberg
14 minute read
March 01, 2017 | FC&S Insurance
Special Interrogatories in Coverage Disputes: the Hidden RiskWhen insurance coverage disputes turn on answers to questions of fact or the nature of the claim for which an insured may be held liable, a special verdict…
By Benjamin Zelermyer and Jeffrey G. Steinberg
5 minute read
February 23, 2017 | New York Law Journal
Special Interrogatories in Coverage Disputes: the Hidden RiskBenjamin Zelermyer and Jeffrey G. Steinberg write: When insurance coverage disputes turn on answers to questions of fact or the nature of the claim for which an insured may be held liable, a special verdict or answers to special interrogatories should be considered. Besides potential gains of obviating the need for a separate trial and avoiding the risk of inconsistent determinations, there are serious risks in not moving to intervene.
By Benjamin Zelermyer and Jeffrey G. Steinberg
9 minute read
November 06, 2014 | New York Law Journal
An Insured's 'Right' to 'Independent' CounselBenjamin Zelermyer and Jeffrey G. Steinberg write: If an insurer reserves its right to deny coverage, even while agreeing to defend an insured against a third party's claim, or denies coverage for a loss while accepting the duty to defend the insured, the insured has the right to be represented by defense counsel chosen by the insured and paid by the insurance carrier. While that principle may be simply stated, its application, not surprisingly, is more complex.
By Benjamin Zelermyer and Jeffrey G. Steinberg
10 minute read