GC Email
Sep. 9, 2016
State high court asked to define 'occurrence' under CGL policy
Courtesy of the 9th Circuit, the state high court has been afforded the opportunity to answer whether claims for negligent hiring, retention and supervision arising out of the intentional acts of an employee constitute an "occurrence" under a CGL policy. By Michael R. Velladao
Courtesy of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, the California Supreme Court has been afforded the opportunity to close the gap in California insurance law regarding whether claims for negligent hiring, retention and supervision arising out of the intentional acts of an employee constitute an "occurrence" (i.e., accident) under a commercial general liability (CGL) policy. The 9th Circuit asked the California Supreme Court...
For only $95 a month (the price of 2 article purchases)
Receive unlimited article access and full access to our archives,
Daily Appellate Report, award winning columns, and our
Verdicts and Settlements.
Or
$795 for an entire year!
Or access this article for $45
(Purchase provides 7-day access to this article. Printing, posting or downloading is not allowed.)
Already a subscriber?
Sign In