Save on this program with an Individual Membership
With a yearly Individual Membership, you get:
- On-Demand Learning
- Live Webcasts and Groupcasts
- 400 PLI and SEC Institute Forums
-
Interactive Learning Center Programs

On-Demand
When a liability insurer agrees to defend its policyholder, the policyholder often breathes a sigh of relief, believing that it now has the comfort of a defense against what could otherwise be debilitating litigation. And, indeed, sometimes that is exactly what the defense is – the insurer steps up, provides a robust defense to the policyholder against the underlying claim and the policyholder and insurer, united in common interest, march together in lockstep against the underlying plaintiff.
This united front between policyholder and insurer, however, does not always exist. In some cases, insurers deploy a toolbox of often highly effective tactics that minimize their defense obligation by limiting their defense spending. In practical terms, on the front end during the course of the defense, these tools can sometimes limit the insurer’s defense spending to a mere fraction of the policyholder’s actual defense costs.
Some of the front end tools frequently deployed by insurers during the course of the defense to limit their spending on defense of the policyholder include the following:
On the back end (often after the defense), if there is a ruling that some or all of the claims against which the insurer was defending the policyholder were not or were potentially not covered, some insurers will seek to recover those “uncovered” defense costs back from the policyholder. This is known as “recoupment.” Insurers will sometimes attempt recoupment even if their right to recoupment is not found in the subject policy.
These insurer tactics have provoked intense conflicts between policyholders and insurers and have sparked often fierce coverage litigation in the courts between the two sides.
This presentation will explore each of the above issues, how U.S. courts have treated them and offer strategies to policyholders for overcoming these insurer methods for limiting their defense obligations.
Please join Sills Cummis & Gross P.C. Member Scott D. Greenspan, the Co-Chair of the firm’s Insurance Practice Group and the Chair of its New York Insurance Practice Group, as he addresses:
Who Should Attend: In-house counsel, outside attorneys, insurance, compliance and other allied professionals interested in the latest insurance coverage issues arising when insurers attempt to minimize their defense obligation to their policyholders and recoup already-paid defense costs
Program Level: Overview
Prerequisites: None
Advanced Preparation: None
Faculty:
Scott D. Greenspan
Sills Cummis & Gross P.C.
With a yearly Individual Membership, you get: