A federal appeals court overturned lower court rulings on Wednesday and agreed with insurers that interruptions in COVID-19 could be heard in federal district courts rather than state courts. Philadelphia, which dealt with insurance disputes over COVID-19-related closures of various restaurants in Pennsylvania and New Jersey, did not address coverage issues, but marks another gain for insurers in litigation in state and federal courts over pandemic-related losses  Although court decisions have Varied with policy formulations and other issues, federal courts have generally issued judgments that are consistently more favorable to insurers than state courts.
The appeal covered three cases: Dianoia & # 39 ;s Eatery LLC, dba Dianoia & # 39 ;s and Pizzeria Davide v Motorists Mutual Insurance Co. ; Umami Pittsburgh LLC dba Umami v. Motorists Commercial Mutual Insurance Co. ; and Mark Daniel Hospitality LLC, dba INC v. Amguard Insurance Co. The lawsuits were filed in state courts and then taken to federal courts at the request of insurance companies. Each of the federal courts returned the cases to the state courts, citing the discretion granted to them under the US Declaratory Judgment Act. jurisdiction of its subject but "a district court's assessment under DJA is not absolute."
The Court cited its 201
According to the appeal decision, the courts either "interpreted certain Reifer factors, failed to fully address the alleged novelty in constitutional matters or did not create a register sufficient for us to effectively abuse discretionary check. "
The court remanded the cases for further consideration.
Lawyers representing Motorist Commercial Mutual declined to comment. Law firms representing Dianoia's Eatery, Umami, INC and Amguard did not immediately respond to requests for comment.   ]