BarbriSFCourseDetails
  1. keyboard_arrow_leftBack

Course Details

Course Information
  • smart_display Format

    On-Demand

  • signal_cellular_alt Difficulty Level

  • work Practice Area

    Insurance

Date & Time
  • event Date

    Wednesday, June 16, 2021

  • schedule Time

    1:00 p.m. ET./10:00 a.m. PT

  • timer Program Length

    90 minutes

Credit Information

  • This 90-minute webinar is eligible in most states for 1.5 CLE credits.

$297.00
CLE
ALL

This CLE course will review the effect of the concurrent proximate cause rule in coverage litigation where the plaintiff asserts coverage for losses resulting from multiple alleged causes, some covered and some excluded. The program will discuss different standards and approaches taken by various courts in applying the rule and distinguish the efficient proximate cause rule. The program will also address the benefits and risks of attorney involvement in multiple-cause claim investigations and coverage decisions concerning the attorney-client privilege and work product.

Faculty

Kenneth Goleaner
Counsel
Sandberg Phoenix & von Gontard, PC

Focusing his legal practice on insurance coverage and bad faith matters, Mr. Goleaner is experienced in all aspects of litigation, from discovery, depositions and expert witness preparation to complex contract interpretation and drafting, appellate work in defense of insurance companies, and arguments before the Missouri Supreme Court.

expand_circle_down Expand to View Full Bio expand_circle_up Collapse Bio
Katrina Smeltzer
Shareholder
Sandberg Phoenix & von Gontard, PC

Ms. Smeltzer is a business litigator, focusing her practice on representing professionals, assisting insurance companies with coverage decisions and resolving construction disputes.

expand_circle_down Expand to View Full Bio expand_circle_up Collapse Bio

Description

The concurrent proximate cause rule states that coverage exists if any covered cause leads to a covered loss. That excluded causes contributed to the loss is not relevant.

But a claim that at first glance appears to be excluded may quickly pivot into a covered claim. After the insurer denies coverage for a loss that is ostensibly the result of an excluded cause, the injured party may file suit against the insured--or sometimes against a different insured--recasting the excluded cause as some form of negligence, for example, failure to provide adequate security, negligent supervision, or negligent training.

In deciding whether the concurrent proximate cause rule has been triggered, courts have labored to articulate a precise formulation for a test. Some analyze the relationship between the loss, the excluded cause, and the potentially covered cause differently. In some states, concurring causes must be independent and distinct from each other for the rule to apply. Others have focused on whether the covered cause is dependent on the excluded cause for success.

Listen as this experienced panel reviews how to defend against the concurrent proximate cause rule and the related issues of attorney involvement in claims investigation and coverage decisions.

Outline

  1. Introduction
  2. Key policy provisions
  3. Court application of the concurrent proximate cause rule
  4. Risks and benefits of attorney involvement in the claims assessment process

Benefits

The panel will review these and other key issues:

  • In what types of claims does concurrent proximate cause rule arise most often?
  • What are the consequences of denying a covered claim?
  • Can the insurer prove that a "covered" cause is a sham?