ACC 543 EDU Something Great -acc543edu.com

recover the cash found in Fuentes’s apartment. The state of Florida intervened in the case, also claiming an interest in the money. Who wins? State of Florida v. Green, 456 So.2d 1309, Web 1984 Fla.App. Lexis 15340 (Court of Appeal of Florida) 50.1 Exclusion from Insurance Policy Richard Usher’s home was protected by a homeowners’ policy issued by National American Insurance Company of California.

The policy included personal liability insurance. A provision in the policy read: ―Personal liability and coverage do not apply to bodily injury or property damage arising out of the ownership, maintenance, use, loading, or unloading of a motor vehicle owned or operated by, or rented or loaned to any insured.‖ Usher parked a Chevrolet van he owned in his driveway. He left the van’s side door open while he loaded the van in preparation for a camping trip. While Usher was inside his house, several children, including 2-year-old Graham Coburn, began playing near the van.

One of the children climbed into the driver’s seat and moved the shift lever from park to reverse. The van rolled backward, crushing Coburn and killing him. Coburn’s parents sued Usher for negligence. Is the accident covered by Usher’s homeowners’ policy? National American Insurance Company of California v. Coburn, 209 Cal. App.3d 914, 257 Cal.Rptr. 591, Web 1989 Cal.App. Lexis 356 (Court of Appeal of California) 50.6 Malpractice Insurance Donald Barker, a wealthy Oregon resident, went to the law firm Winokur, Schoenberg, Maier, Hamerman& Knudson to have his estate planned. An attorney at the firm repeatedly told Barker that he could convey half of his $20-million estate to his wife tax free under Oregon’s marital deduction.

Barker had his will drawn based on the law firm’s advice. It was not until after Barker died three years later that Barker’s family learned that Oregon does not recognize the marital deduction. As a result, the will’s beneficiaries were subject to significant estate taxes. The beneficiaries sued the law firm for negligence, and the case was settled for $2 million. At the time Barker was being advised by the law firm, it had a professional malpractice insurance policy with the Travelers Insurance Company (Travelers) that covered ―all sums which the insured shall become legally obligated to pay as damages because of any act or omission of the insured arising out of the performance of professional services for others in the insured’s capacity as a lawyer.‖ The policy expired one year prior to Barker’s death. Is Travelers liable for the $2 million settlement? Travelers Insurance Company v. National Union Fire Insurance Company of Pittsburgh, 207 Cal. App.3d 1390, 255 Cal.Rptr. 727, Web 1989 Cal.App. Lexis 130 (Court of Appeal of California) 50.7 Duty to Defend When Michael A. Jaffe, a child psychiatrist practicing in California, was accused of Medi–Cal fraud and theft, he requested that his malpractice insurer, Cranford Insurance Company (Cranford), provide his criminal defense. Cranford refused to defend Jaffe, citing the terms of Jaffe’s malpractice insurance policy. The policy describes the insured risk as ―psychiatrist’s professional liability in respect of insured’s practice of psychiatry.‖