OTHER STATES

APRIL 07
Pennsylvania bill would force COVID-19 business interruption coverage
Pennsylvania lawmakers have joined Louisiana, New York, Ohio, Massachusetts and New Jersey in introducing a bill that would force insurers to retroactively cover business interruption claims due to COVID-19. Read more here.

Minnesota Legislature OKs workers compensation for coronavirus first responders
The Minnesota Legislature on Tuesday approved a bipartisan proposal to allow emergency responders to draw workers compensation benefits if they contract the coronavirus while on the job. Read more here.

MARCH 30
The Colorado Division of Insurance Emergency Regulation 20-E-03
CONCERNING RESTRICTIONS ON COVERAGE FOR USE OF A PERSONAL AUTOMOBILE OR AS AN ADDITIONAL UNNAMED DRIVER ON A RESTAURANT COMMERCIAL AUTOMOBILE POLICY FOR FOOD DELIVERY DURING PENDENCY OF PUBLIC HEALTH ORDER 20-22. Read the regulation here.

MARCH 26
West Virginia Insurance Commissioner James A. Dodrill

“For example, insurance policies generally contain exclusions for loss or damage caused by war, nuclear accident and radiation. The potential loss costs from such perils are so great that providing coverage would jeopardize the financial solvency of insurers and many businesses could not afford the premium costs to cover such catastrophic events even if theywere covered perils. Global pandemics like COVID-19 usually fall into this category of risks or perils that are not covered.Read more here.

MARCH 25
Native American casino owner sues Lloyd’s, AIG over coronavirus losses
A Native American tribe on Tuesday sued a group of insurance companies, asking a court to declare that losses it is incurring from shutting down its casinos during the coronavirus pandemic are covered by insurance. Read the full story here.

MARCH 24
Ohio state Representatives Jeffrey Crossman and John Rogers introduced legislation requiring every policy of insurance insuring against loss or damage to property, which includes the loss of use and occupancy and business interruption, to be interpreted to include coverage for global virus transmission. This coverage would apply for businesses with 100 or fewer employees who have that type of coverage. To read the legislation go here.

Massachusetts Senator James Eldridge and Representative Nika Elugardo filed SD 2888, which would require coverage of COVID-19 for policies sold to businesses in the commonwealth with 150 or fewer full-time employees, as long as the policies were in place by the time the March 10th emergency declaration was issued by the Governor. To read the legislation go here.

MARCH 22
New York State posted frequently asked questions about business interruption insurance and a gubernatorial executive order cited telecommuting for financial services institutions.

MARCH 17
Georgia Insurance Commissioner John F. King

“Virus and disease are not typically an insured peril unless added by endorsement. Most policies generally exclude loss caused by or resulting from any virus, bacterium, or other microorganism that induces or is capable of inducing physical distress, illness, or disease.” Read more here.

MARCH 16
First lawsuit filed over business interruption insurance
A New Orleans, Louisiana restaurant is suing Lloyd’s of London, hoping a judge will order the U.K. based insurance market to cover losses caused by government-ordered closures due to the coronavirus. The suit against Lloyd’s of London was filed on March 16, seeking a declaratory judgment to proactively force the insurance carrier to pay for losses from a pandemic. Read more here.

New Jersey Assembly Bill 3844 provides that every policy of insurance insuring against loss or damage to property, which includes the loss of use and occupancy and business interruption, in force on the date of the Executive Order, shall be construed to include among the covered perils under that policy coverage for business interruption due to global birus transmission or pandemic… Read the bill here.

In response to New Jersey Assembly Bill 3822, The Insurance Council of New Jersey wrote this Statement of Opposition saying in part, “…requiring insurers to provide coverage where none exists is in direct conflict with the U.S. Constitution non-impairment clause that is to safeguard the integrity of contracts against unwarranted interference by the State…”. Read the complete statement here.