Howard B. Epstein

May 22, 2013 | New York Law Journal

In their Corporate Insurance Law column, Howard B. Epstein and Theodore A. Keyes of Schulte Roth & Zabel write: As a result of the rise of cyber incidents and the increased focus on computer security, more insurance carriers have begun offering insurance to cover cyber risk liability. Not surprisingly, more companies are purchasing these policies, particularly those companies in the financial services, technology and health care industries.

By Howard B. Epstein and Theodore A. Keyes

9 minute read

June 29, 2012 | New York Law Journal

In their Corporate Insurance Law column, Howard B. Epstein and Theodore A. Keyes of Schulte Roth & Zabel write that most liability policies contain a standard no-transfer clause to protect the insurer from a material increase in risk resulting from an ownership change. Courts differ, however, as to how this clause is enforced.

By Howard B. Epstein and Theodore A. Keyes

12 minute read

March 06, 2008 | New York Law Journal

Howard B. Epstein, a partner at Schulte Roth & Zabel, and Theodore A. Keyes, special counsel at the firm, write that two recent cases in New York's federal courts addressed claims for insurance coverage for first-party property damage resulting from the dispersal of debris caused by the collapse of the World Trade Center towers. Both cases turned on whether the property damage caused by the particulate should be considered "contamination" within the meaning of an exclusion.

By Howard B. Epstein and Theodore A. Keyes

10 minute read

May 08, 2008 | New York Law Journal

Howard B. Epstein, a partner at Schulte Roth & Zabel, and Theodore A. Keyes, special counsel at the firm, report on recent rulings where the Court of Appeals held that an insured may recover consequential damages resulting from an insurer's breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing provided the damages were "within the contemplation of the parties as the probable result of a breach at the time of or prior to contracting."

By Howard B. Epstein and Theodore A. Keyes

11 minute read

January 05, 2007 | New York Law Journal

Howard B. Epstein, a partner at Schulte Roth & Zabel, and Theodore A. Keyes, special counsel at the firm, write that, whether expressly identified or not, ejusdem generis, noscitur a sociis and other fundamental doctrines continue to serve as building blocks for construing insurance policies and resolving coverage disputes. In NFL v. Vigilant, the NFL relied on these doctrines to its advantage to complete its victory in the Clarett matter.

By Howard B. Epstein and Theodore A. Keyes

10 minute read

November 08, 2004 | New York Law Journal

Howard B. Epstein, a partner at Schulte Roth & Zabel, and Theodore A. Keyes, special counsel at the firm, write that the importance of the deemer clause, in liability insurance policies, which typically governs the treatment of related claims or interrelated wrongful acts, is often overlooked.

By Howard B. Epstein and Theodore A. Keyes

10 minute read

July 01, 2009 | New York Law Journal

Howard B. Epstein, a partner at Schulte Roth & Zabel, and Theodore A. Keyes, special counsel at the firm, write: In Continental Casualty Co. v. Employers Ins. Co. of Wausau, the Appellate Division, First Department issued an uncommon decision upholding the insurance carriers' laches defense and finding that coverage was barred due to prejudice caused by the insured's delay in asserting a new coverage theory.

By Howard B. Epstein and Theodore A. Keyes

11 minute read

September 01, 2004 | New York Law Journal

Howard B. Epstein, a partner, and Lawrence P. Schnapf, an attorney, at Schulte Roth & Zabel, discuss some of the emerging issues involving eligibility, liability relief, and the tax credits that have surfaced during the implementation process of the Brownfield Cleanup Law.

By Howard B. Epstein and Lawrence P. Schnapf

11 minute read

September 04, 2009 | New York Law Journal

Howard B. Epstein, a partner at Schulte Roth & Zabel, and Theodore A. Keyes, special counsel at the firm, review two recent First Department decisions that appear to adopt different approaches to disputes over allocation of defense costs involving overlapping insurance. In one, the court held that where one of two primary policies has an other insurance clause that makes it excess, the duty to defend in the policy with the excess other insurance clause will not be triggered until the other primary policy is exhausted. The earlier decision had held that where two primary policies do not cover the same risk, an other insurance clause purporting to make one policy excess is not applicable.

By Howard B. Epstein and Theodore A. Keyes

11 minute read

November 29, 2005 | New York Law Journal

Howard B. Epstein, partner at Schulte Roth & Zabel, and Theodore A. Keyes, special counsel at the firm, write that with the New York City area particularly vulnerable to economic loss from a storm, and considering that the vast majority of property owners decline to purchase flood insurance, coverage for storm damages is at best a risky proposition and may depend on whether the damage was caused by wind or by flood water.

By Howard B. Epstein and Theodore A. Keyes

13 minute read