{"id":901015,"date":"2023-04-04T14:56:39","date_gmt":"2023-04-04T20:56:39","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/?p=901015"},"modified":"2023-04-04T14:56:50","modified_gmt":"2023-04-04T20:56:50","slug":"when-insurance-claim-is-a-claim-timely-notice","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/when-insurance-claim-is-a-claim-timely-notice\/","title":{"rendered":"When Does a Claim Become a \u201cClaim\u201d? A Lesson on Timely Notice"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Matthew J. Revis and Patrick M. McDermott | Hunton Andrews Kurth<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

On March 20, 2023, the Southern District of New York\u00a0denied\u00a0a policyholder\u2019s claim for coverage and granted the insurer\u2019s motion for judgment on the pleadings in\u00a0Pine Management, Inc. v. Colony Insurance Company<\/em>. The parties disputed whether a real estate liability insurance policy provided defense and indemnification for Pine Management, Inc. in an underlying lawsuit brought by numerous companies that Pine managed. A simple question proved pivotal in the outcome: whether Pine had timely sought coverage for its claim<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Two key policy provisions guided the court\u2019s analysis. First, to trigger coverage, Pine\u2019s losses must have resulted from \u201ca Claim first made and reported in writing during the Policy Period\u201d \u2013 August 1, 2018 to December 1, 2019. Second, the policy defined \u201cClaim\u201d as \u201ca written demand received by [Pine] for monetary, non-monetary or injunctive relief.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The underlying plaintiffs filed suit on July 26, 2019. However, their counsel sent a letter to Pine advising of the plaintiffs\u2019 claims over a year earlier on July 17, 2018. Because Pine received this letter approximately two weeks prior to the policy\u2019s inception, the court needed to decide whether the letter constituted a Claim. If so, Colony could deny coverage because there was no \u201cClaim first made and reported in writing during the Policy Period.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In holding that the letter was a Claim under the policy, the court highlighted a few facts to support its conclusion:<\/p>\n\n\n\n