Courts considering agent and broker errors and omissions claims are relying more and more on a presumption that intermediaries are–and present themselves as–experts in insurance coverage.
This trend means that more juries may be charged with deciding whether a very general request for coverage from a customer can form the basis of a claim for negligence or breach of contract against their agent or broker, when it turns out the customer doesn't have sufficient insurance to cover a specific loss.
A September 2007 ruling from the Appellate Division, First Department of the Supreme Court of New York in Hersch vs. DeWitt Stern Group Inc., provides one example of the trend.
Want to continue reading?
Become a Free PropertyCasualty360 Digital Reader
Your access to unlimited PropertyCasualty360 content isn’t changing.
Once you are an ALM digital member, you’ll receive:
- Breaking insurance news and analysis, on-site and via our newsletters and custom alerts
- Weekly Insurance Speak podcast featuring exclusive interviews with industry leaders
- Educational webcasts, white papers, and ebooks from industry thought leaders
- Critical converage of the employee benefits and financial advisory markets on our other ALM sites, BenefitsPRO and ThinkAdvisor
Already have an account? Sign In Now
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
