'K2' and Consequences of Insurers' Breach of Duty to Defend

, New York Law Journal


In their Corporate Insurance Law column, Howard B. Epstein and Theodore A. Keyes write: The recent decision in 'K2-II' does not alter the landmark Court of Appeals' decision issued in 'Isadore Rosen & Sons.' The K2-II decision makes clear that in the absence of a covered loss, the insurer simply has no duty to indemnify. In contrast, under Isadore Rosen, an insurer that breaches the duty to defend a claim for loss that is covered under the policy will be held liable for the insured's reasonable settlement of that claim—regardless of whether the insurer consented to such settlement.

This content has been archived. It is available exclusively through our partner LexisNexis®.

To view this content, please continue to Lexis Advance®.

Continue to Lexis Advance®

Not a Lexis Advance® Subscriber? Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® is now the exclusive third party online distributor of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® customers will be able to access and use ALM's content by subscribing to the LexisNexis® services via Lexis Advance®. This includes content from the National Law Journal®, The American Lawyer®, Law Technology News®, The New York Law Journal® and Corporate Counsel®, as well as ALM's other newspapers, directories, legal treatises, published and unpublished court opinions, and other sources of legal information.

ALM's content plays a significant role in your work and research, and now through this alliance LexisNexis® will bring you access to an even more comprehensive collection of legal content.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at customercare@alm.com

What's being said

Comments are not moderated. To report offensive comments, click here.

Preparing comment abuse report for Article #1202653997718

Thank you!

This article's comments will be reviewed.