HNRK Coverage Corner

On April 8, 2024, the Sixth Circuit issued an opinion in Great Am. Fidelity Ins. Co. v. Stout Risius Ross, Inc., Case No. 23-1167/1195, holding that, under Michigan law, an insurer was entitled to seek reimbursement of defense costs upon a finding it had no duty to defend. 

Although the policy “did not expressly authorize such reimbursement,” the Sixth Circuit, making an “Erie guess” as to how the Michigan Supreme Court would resolve the issue, found that where “an insurer explicitly reserves its right to reimbursement and notifies the insured of the specific possibility of ...

On November 14, 2023, the Supreme Court of Hawaii issued a decision in St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. Co. v. Bodell Construction Co., Case No. SCCQ-22-0000658, holding that insurers may not recoup defense costs for non-covered claims absent an express policy provision for reimbursement. 

Answering a certified question from the United States District Court for the District of Hawaii, the Court explained:

The duty to defend is broader than the duty to indemnify.  An insurer only indemnifies covered claims.  But an insurer must defend when there is possible coverage, even “groundless ...

On July 13, 2023, the Eleventh Circuit issued a decision in Continental Casualty Co. v. Winder Laboratories, LLC, Case No. 21-11758, resolving an issue of first impression under Georgia law—whether an insurer can recoup defense costs it paid under a duty to defend policy upon a finding that the insurer has no duty to indemnify the insured.  The Court ruled that such recoupment is not permitted unless the policy expressly provides for it, explaining:   

As an initial matter, we disagree with the insurers’ argument that there is a clear “majority” rule favoring recoupment across ...

On March 31, 2023, Justice Cohen of the New York County Supreme Court, Commercial Division issued a decision in Liberty Ins. Underwriters Inc. v. Plaza Condominium, 2023 NY Slip Op 31035(U), granting an insurer’s motion to recoup defense expenses from the insured, after the Court found that there was no duty to indemnify.  The Court explained: 

Liberty established in its original summary judgment papers that it defended the Underlying Action subject to a reservation of rights, which included (implicitly at first, then explicitly) a right to recoup expenses if it were later ...

On January 9, 2023, Justice Lebovits of the New York County Supreme Court issued a decision in Peleus Ins. Co. v RCD Restorations Inc., 2023 NY Slip Op 50034(U), holding that an insurer could not recoup defense costs from its insured, without an express reservation of the right of recoupment.  The Court explained:

Although Peleus provided RCD with coverage in the underlying action/third-party action under a reservation of rights (see NYSCEF No. 17 [reservation of rights letter]), the letter notifying RCD of Peleus’s coverage position did not reserve the right "to recoup expenses ...