Carrier Client v. Co-Carrier Contribution Action
Advertising injury coverage disputes can be technical and dicey. Whether under coverage B of the CGL form or an endorsement crafted by the carrier, the disputes often involve issues of first impression and claims with considerable amounts at stake. Over the years, Hardiman & Carroll has been asked to advise carriers on these coverage issues and, in several instances, to seek a determination through a declaratory relief, contribution or indemnity action.
Recently, an advertising injury claim was presented to a carrier client of the firm. The claim implicated both duty to defend and duty to indemnify issues under policies issued by several different carriers. The Hardiman & Carroll carrier client recognized its duty to defend; the other carriers did not.
Following settlement of the underlying case, Michael Hardiman sued the denying carriers for contribution. Through creative lawyering and motions for Summary Judgment, Michael was able to recover for the client all defense expenses paid in defending the underlying suit and all indemnity dollars paid in settlement.