Insurance Coverage: Defining Physical Loss or Damage; Testing Assumptions About What Triggers Coverage
Recording of a 90-minute CLE video webinar with Q&A
This CLE webinar will discuss whether "physical loss or damage" sufficient to trigger prima facie coverage under a property or business income policy requires the policyholder to present evidence of "distinct, demonstrable, physical alteration of the property." The panel of both policyholder and insurer counsel will review the origins of the physical alteration requirement and then consider the merits of recent scholarship arguing that the physical alteration requirement is a fallacy perpetuated by errors in a well known insurance law treatise that courts accept without adequate analysis.
- Historical overview of property insurance
- General framework of business interruption insurance coverage
- Arguments and cases regarding virus as property damage
- Arguments and cases regarding coverage for closure by civil authority
- Recommendations for insureds and insurers going forward
The panel will review these and other pivotal questions:
- What is the physical alteration of property?
- How do other insurance treatises define direct physical loss?
- From whose perspective is loss defined?
Lorelie S. Masters
Hunton Andrews Kurth
Ms. Masters handles all aspects of complex, commercial litigation and arbitration. She has advised clients on a wide... | Read More
Ms. Masters handles all aspects of complex, commercial litigation and arbitration. She has advised clients on a wide range of liability coverages, including insurance for environmental, employment, directors and officers, fiduciary, property damage, cyber, and other liabilities. Ms. Masters also handles various types of first-party property insurance claims, including claims under boiler and machinery, business-interruption, contingent business-interruption, extra expense, disability and other related coverages.Close
Jeffrey S. Raskin
Morgan Lewis & Bockius
Mr. Raskin is head of the firm’s Insurance Recovery Practice in the San Francisco office. He has... | Read More
Mr. Raskin is head of the firm’s Insurance Recovery Practice in the San Francisco office. He has represented clients involved in litigation, arbitration and mediation in matters related to insurance coverage, environmental disputes, and IP disputes, among others. Mr. Raskin has handled insurance matters seeking recovery for catastrophic losses in environmental, asbestos, silica, toxic tort, product liability, and securities cases.Close
Max H. Stern
Mr. Stern is the head of the firm’s Insurance Litigation Division. As a trial and appellate lawyer, he has... | Read More
Mr. Stern is the head of the firm’s Insurance Litigation Division. As a trial and appellate lawyer, he has extensive experience with respect to coverage, bad faith, reinsurance and regulatory disputes, spanning multiple lines, including specialty, professional, excess and general liability. His work representing insurers has earned him a spot on numerous leading lawyers lists, including Chambers USA (both the Nationwide and California lists), Legal500, and Martindale-Hubbell.Close
Eric B. Stern
Kaufman Dolowich Voluck
Mr. Stern concentrates his practice in all aspects of insurance coverage litigation. He has analyzed, written on and... | Read More
Mr. Stern concentrates his practice in all aspects of insurance coverage litigation. He has analyzed, written on and litigated over various types of policies, including D&O liability, professional liability, CGL, uninsured/underinsured motorist, homeowners’ liability, and first-party policies. Mr. Stern has successfully defended insurers in multiple matters and has reported decisions at the trial level. Due to Mr. Stern’s experience in this area, he has become a frequent presenter on multiple topics.Close