قالب وردپرس درنا توس
Home / Insurance / Federal court rules against attorney in COVID-19 interruption case

Federal court rules against attorney in COVID-19 interruption case



A federal district court in Philadelphia has become the latest court to try a policyholder in COVID-19 disputes, and considers that a lawyer does not have business interruption coverage due to a virus exclusion in her policy.

Rhonda Hill Wilson and the Philadelphia Law Firm of Rhonda Hill Wilson had filed a lawsuit against Hartford Financial Services Group Inc., the Hartford Casualty Co. and USI Insurance Services LLC who sued for breach of contract for their refusal to compensate her for her business interruption after her office was forced to close in March due to the pandemic, according to Wednesday's decision by the U.S. District Court in Philadelphia Rhonda Hill Wilson, et al. v. Hartford Casualty Co., et al. Her trial also sought explanatory and injunction relief.

The court found that Wilson's policy of limited fungal, bacterial or viral coverage, which has a limit of $ 50,000, is not applicable because it only covers specific causes of loss and lists factors. including collapse of boreholes and volcanic action and "equipment degradation accidents." "Equipment distribution", "appears from the decision when they granted the defendants' proposal to reject the case.

Ms. Wilson said in a statement, "We will decide on the next step." Hartford and USI attorneys did not respond to a request for comment.

Last week, a U.S. district court in Florida refused to dismiss a COVID-1

9 business interruption case filed by a medical group against another Hartford unit, arguing that a virus exclusion in the policy is ambiguous.

Most of the other decisions, which have been to the benefit of insurers, have focused on whether policyholders suffered a "direct physical loss." Catalog

Catalog


Source link