Remove 2021 Remove Casing Remove Insurance
article thumbnail

Fifth Circuit Holds That Foreign Forum Selection Clauses Are Enforceable In Insurance Policy

The Energy Law

The following day, Noble House advised Underwriters at Lloyd’s, its insurer, of the casualty, whose policy allegedly covered the claim. Noble House purchased the policy from Underwriters by way of a Texas-based insurance broker in February 2018. District Court for the Southern District of Texas in November of 2021. May 1, 2023).

article thumbnail

Supreme Court Punts on Important Arbitrability Question

The Energy Law

2021) (“Henry Schein II”). The distributor argued that the inclusion of its request for injunctive relief brought the case under the carve-out in the arbitration provision. This is now the second time this case has been before the Supreme Court on issues of arbitrability. Henry Schein, Inc. Archer & White Sales, Inc.,

Casing 76
Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

article thumbnail

11th Circuit Finds Not All Disputed Medical Evidence Must be Construed in a Seaman’s Favor

The Energy Law

527 (1962) requires courts hearing maintenance and cure cases to construe disputed medical evidence in the seaman’s favor. On appeal, the Eleventh Circuit held that Vaughan does not require courts hearing maintenance and cure cases to construe all disputed medical evidence in the seaman’s favor. Supreme Court holding in Vaughan v.

article thumbnail

Riding to the Danger Zone: U.S. Fifth Circuit Panel Considers the Zone-of-Danger Test for Maritime Emotional Distress

The Energy Law

20-30300, 2021 WL 96168, a three-judge panel of the U.S. The district court dismissed their case under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). The district court dismissed their case under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). On January 11, 2021, the Fifth Circuit panel affirmed. 2021 WL 96168 at *2.

article thumbnail

Fifth Circuit Identifies Potential Conflict with Supreme Court on Jones Act Seaman Test

The Energy Law

Maintaining that the plaintiff qualified as a seaman under controlling Fifth Circuit precedent but questioning that precedent in light of Supreme Court case law, the panel urged the Fifth Circuit to review the case en banc. Both plaintiffs were seaman under the nature test, and the panel could not distinguish Sanchez’s case.

Casing 40