Claims Advocacy for Venture Capital Firm

We represented one of the country’s largest venture capital firms in several disputes with its liability insurer including a dispute concerning coverage for alleged liability arising out of conduct by rogue shareholder representative, in which we obtained a substantial contribution from the insurer to settlement of the underlying matter. We continue to represent the same client in ongoing negotiations concerning coverage for a securities class action filed against the venture capital firm and its appointed board member, arising out of one of the largest losses in the history of venture capital.

Firm Highlights

Publication

Insurance for the Cannabis Industry Program Takeaways

I recently moderated a Bar Association of San Francisco Insurance Section program co-sponsored with the Cannabis Law Section. The program highlighted recent changes to local insurance requirements and market availability of coverage for cannabis...

Event

WSJ Pro Cybersecurity Symposium

Tyler Gerking will be speaking at the WSJ Pro Cybersecurity Symposium session, "The Role of Cyber-Insurance." Details: How much should you buy, what does it cover and how does it fit with an overall...

Publication

3 Lessons For Calif. Insureds From Late-Notice Rule Decision

In Pitzer College v. Indian Harbor Insurance Company ,[1] the California Supreme Court resolved two previously open questions in insurance law: (1) it concluded that the notice-prejudice rule[2] is a fundamental public policy of...

Publication

California Supreme Court Ruling Clarifies That the Notice-Prejudice Rule Is a Fundamental Public Policy That May Override Choice of Law Provisions

In Pitzer College v. Indian Harbor Insurance Company , the California Supreme Court resolved two previously open questions in insurance law: (1) it concluded that the notice-prejudice rule [1] is a fundamental public policy...

Publication

Damages for Permit Revocation Constitute Covered “Loss of Use”

Insurers often claim “economic damages” are not covered under a standard commercial general liability (CGL) policy. The Fourth District Court of Appeal’s decision in Thee Sombrero, Inc. v. Scottsdale Ins. Co., 28 Cal. App...

Publication

Reimbursement of Employment-Related Expenses Is Not a “Wage and Hour” Claim Within the Meaning of EPLI Exclusion

A recent California appellate court decision found that a wage and hour exclusion in an Employment Practices Liability Insurance (“EPLI”) policy did not bar coverage for claims under California Labor Code sections 2800 and...

Publication

INSIGHT: California Ruling in Wage-Hour Coverage Suit Offers Employers a Defense Hook

Wage-and-hour exclusions are common in EPLI policies, frequently with defense-only sub-limits that are woefully inadequate. Farella Braun + Martel LLP’s Shanti Eagle looks at a recent decision adding an avenue to establish or expand...

News

Farella Braun + Martel Ranked Among “Best Law Firms” by U.S. News & World Report and Best Lawyers

Publication

Are Losses Resulting from Phishing Incidents Covered by Crime Policies Insuring Against Computer Fraud?

It is an all-too-common dilemma. As phishing schemes have become more prevalent and more sophisticated, businesses of all sizes have fallen victim to these attacks where a fraudster will use a spoofed email or other...

Publication

“That Particular Part” – Yet More

Massachusetts Appeals Court Gets It Right – Mostly Hot on the heels of the Federal Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals’ decision in MTI, Inc. v. Employers Insurance Company of Wausau , __ F.3d __...