Latest on Stacking, Viking Pump/Warren, Non-Cumulation and/or “Other-Insurance” Clauses, and Anti-Stacking Provisions
Viking Pump/Warren dispute, Non-Cumulation and “Other Insurance”, Application of Anti-Stacking Provisions/Clauses
- The Viking Pump/Warren dispute: assessing the latest on whether allocation is impacted by non-cumulation/prior insurance clauses in policies. What’s the impact in New York and elsewhere?
- Addressing the latest on cases such as Viking Pump in which policyholder advocates are trying to unwind pro rata allocation rules by contending that they cannot apply if insurance contracts contain anti-stacking provisions
- Pro rata: Viking Pump and non-cumulation clause: NJ’s “hybrid” approach and other recent decisions
- The interplay between allocation and non-cumulation and/or other-insurance clauses
- “Other insurance” clauses vs. public policy: basics of the operation of Other Insurance clauses, and the resolution of conflicts between competing clauses
“Stacking”: What Can Be “Stacked?”; Differences Among Jurisdictions on the Issue of “Stacking”; Multiple Years of Coverage and Multi-Year Policy Issues
- Stacking” of insurance coverage — what kinds of losses implicate “stacking”?
- What kinds of policies may be potentially “stacked”?
- SIR stacking: In what states and in what circumstances is it appropriate to “stack” self-insured retentions
- In what states can multiple years of coverage be “stacked”?
- Annualization of Limits on Multi-Year Policies
- Differences among the jurisdictions concerning whether “stacking” of Policy Limits is always permitted, never permitted, or permitted only sometimes