Howard B Epstein

June 12, 2020 | New York Law Journal

The central issue in dispute in the vast majority of these business-interruption loss cases is whether or not the insured can demonstrate that the loss resulted from physical loss or damage to property.

By Howard B. Epstein and Theodore A. Keyes

9 minute read

April 09, 2020 | New York Law Journal

As Representations and Warranties Insurance has become more of an industry norm in the United States, parties have increasingly sought to utilize U.S.-style RWI policies for cross-border transactions. There are, however, a number of differences between U.S. and international RWI coverage that all parties involved in a deal need to be mindful of from the start to help ensure a smooth transaction, which Howard B. Epstein, Theodore A. Keyes and Stavan Desai discuss in this edition of their Corporate Insurance column.

By Howard B. Epstein, Theodore A. Keyes and Stavan Desai

10 minute read

January 30, 2020 | New York Law Journal

In their Corporate Insurance Law column, Howard B. Epstein and Theodore A. Keyes discuss a number of issues that outside counsel should consider in order to protect the client's right to advancement of defense costs under the client's directors and officers (D&O) liability insurance policies.

By Howard B. Epstein and Theodore A. Keyes

9 minute read

November 27, 2019 | New York Law Journal

While parties have good reason to seek to achieve some level of certainty through the use of choice of law clauses in insurance policies, the 'Pitzer College' decision serves notice that California courts may disrupt such efforts. In their Corporate Insurance Law column, Howard B. Epstein and Theodore A. Keyes discuss the decision and takeaways.

By Howard B. Epstein and Theodore A. Keyes

9 minute read

September 17, 2019 | New York Law Journal

Courts have wrestled with how to interpret provisions in D&O liability insurance policies defining related claims and interrelated wrongful acts. While New York courts appear to interpret these clauses broadly, recent Delaware case law suggests that Delaware courts will construe the clauses more narrowly. In their Corporate Insurance Law column, Howard Epstein and Theodore Keyes use the recent case 'Pfizer v. Arch Insurance' to discuss this issue.

By Howard B. Epstein and Theodore A. Keyes

8 minute read

June 27, 2019 | New York Law Journal

Corporate Insurance Law columnists Howard B. Epstein and Theodore A. Keyes describe some real-world Representations and Warranties insurance claims and consulted with the experts at Euclid Transactional, who assisted in preparing this column.

By Howard B. Epstein and Theodore A. Keyes

7 minute read

March 28, 2019 | New York Law Journal

Corporate Insurance Law columnists Howard B. Epstein and Theodore A. Keyes write: The Deepwater Horizon oil spill has given rise to some interesting insurance cases which have the potential to impact insurance disputes regardless of venue. In one recent decision, the Supreme Court of Texas ruled that a clause that reduces the insurers' liability for joint venture risks by the insured's percentage interest in the joint venture did not limit the insured's right to recover defense expenses.

By Howard B. Epstein and Theodore A. Keyes

8 minute read

February 06, 2019 | FC&S Insurance

Here, the authors explain, insureds and insurers need to address and plan for the full scope of risk from climate change-related events.

By Howard B. Epstein and Theodore A. Keyes

6 minute read

January 28, 2019 | New York Law Journal

In their Corporate Insurance Law column, Howard B. Epstein and Theodore A. Keyes discuss how climate change-related events such as hurricanes, earthquakes and wildfires can lead to related securities litigation, creating additional risk for corporations, directors and officers and their D&O insurers. 

By Howard B. Epstein and Theodore A. Keyes

6 minute read

December 04, 2018 | New York Law Journal

Corporate Insurance Law columnists Howard B. Epstein and Theodore A. Keyes write: While the 'Kokesh' ruling is not an insurance ruling, we wrote at the time (as did others) that it might very well have an impact on pending disputes over the insurability of disgorgement payments. The First Department took notice of the ruling and recently held, relying on Kokesh, that because SEC disgorgement constitutes a penalty, disgorged funds did not fall within the definition of loss under the insurance policies at issue.

By Howard B. Epstein and Theodore A. Keyes

7 minute read