We’ve collected all of our coverage, analysis and expert commentary related to COVID-19 business interruption cases nationwide (and, in a few instances, worldwide) dating back to the start of the pandemic and will continue to update this page with new developments. The articles are broken into three categories—Key Cases, Trends & Analysis and Expert Commentary—and listed in chronological order with the newest content at the top of each section.
Key Cases
During the argument session, the justices acknowledged that the COVID-19 pandemic, specifically, was not foreseeable at the time the insurance policies were signed, but questioned whether the casino was a “sophisticated” policyholder that should have understood what coverage would or would not apply in the event of a viral outbreak.
The appellate panel said two Oregon state court opinions “suggest the Oregon Supreme Court would interpret the phrase ‘direct physical loss or damage’ as requiring some physical alteration or damage to property such that ‘loss of use’ is insufficient to trigger coverage under the Policy.”
Pa. Supreme Court Agrees to Hear Arguments in Two Diverging COVID-19 Business Interruption Cases
According to the orders granting allocatur, the justices will hear arguments simultaneously in the two cases, in which the Pennsylvania Superior Court reached opposite conclusions regarding coverage.
Notes From an Insurer Win in a Rare Trial Over COVID-19 Business Interruption Coverage Claims
After two weeks of trial, jurors in Santa Monica, California deliberated just 90 minutes last week before finding plaintiffs hadn’t proven that the COVID-19 virus caused any direct physical loss or damage to a Venice Beach hotel—a big win for John Phillips and Brett Ingerman of DLA Piper and their client, an affiliate of Allianz.
Law Firm’s COVID-19 Business Interruption Claim Barred by Virus Exclusion, Judge Says
A federal judge in Connecticut determined that a virus exclusion in an insurance policy bars law firm Kennedy Hodges & Associates and the owner of its office building from bringing a business interruption insurance claim against Twin City Fire Insurance Co. over COVID-19-related losses.
“Although Plaintiff clearly has attempted to plead around these rulings by alleging damage and consequential repairs, the only ‘damage’ the complaint specifically describes is the presence of viral particles on surfaces, and the only ‘repairs’ described are the cleaning (specialized as it was) of Amphenol facilities, the installation of additional barriers and workspaces, and the replacement of HVAC units and filters,” the court said.
“No Oregon appellate court, state statute, or treatise has yet interpreted the phrase ‘direct physical loss or damage’ in the context of a commercial property insurance policy dispute involving COVID-19 allegations,” the Ninth Circuit panel wrote. “Therefore, we find it prudent to allow the Oregon Supreme Court to do so in this instance.”
At NY’s Highest Court, Restaurateurs Aim to Gain Insurance Coverage for COVID Losses
A Texas-based restaurant group is asking New York to lean against the majority of states and open the door for coverage of COVID business losses.
Law Firm’s COVID-19 Business Interruption Claim Barred by Virus Exclusion, Says Judge
