Umm Global Case

The Local, State and Federal agencies were called to investigate the Station Nightclub fire incident and they found many issues. The polyurethane foam that was on the interior walls was the major factor in the Station Nightclub fire. It was easily ignited and also contributed to a faster fire spread within the building. According to NFPA 101, Life Safety Code, the interior finish is required to be Class A or B for general assembly areas with occupant loads of more than 300. It has been calculated that the number of occupants at the Station Nightclub was around 440-458 people, obviously well over this limit. The ignition of polyurethane foam gave out a magnitude of smoke and heat in such a short period of time and created mass chaos, thus resulting in a crowd-wide panic towards the initial entry point. Also NFPA 101, Life Safety Code, section 13.2.3.6.1 states that the main entrance/exit shall be of a width that accommodates one-half of the total occupant load and shall be at the level of exit discharge or shall connect to a stairway or ramp leading to a street. If the owner of The Station Nightclub would have

On 03/07/16 we received a broker invoice advising of an incurred increase in the amount of $1,180,064 (1,137,500 Loss & 42,564.14) along with a billing request for $1,269,607 (1,225,000 Loss & 44,606.94 in Lae). The only other information provided was Harco’s 03/03/16 loss report stating; no meritorious appellate issues, therefore the loss was settled for $5,000,000 with a supplemental payment of $112,000 for plaintiff’s taxable cost. Based on the limited information provided, an internet search was conducted finding that the case was tried with the plaintiff receiving a $6M verdict against the insured on 12/18/15. Based on the above, an inquiry was issued to Harco requesting details regarding their strategy to litigate this loss to a verdict with an explanation as to why the taxable cost of $112,000 was being ceded to reinsurers as an expense.

Fire is one of the risks of a construction project against which Allianz’s policy insures; yet it is only one, and given the wide range coverage of the policy, it seemed odd to the presiding judges to classify it as a fire risk insurance policy. A fire insurance policy is subjected to 19 separate requirements, and until 1990, Michigan legislature, rather than trying to define “fire insurance policy”, provided that a “standard fire policy” (with all 19 mandatory minimum provisions) would not be required for a variety of types of insurance. The structure of this Michigan statute implied any form of insurance that was not exempt was a “standard fire policy”, including a builders risk policy, and so the 19 mandatory provisions would have to have been included when indemnity was sought after. However, this legislature was repealed in 1990, well before Allianz issued the

Because the Contractor Defendants either could not be located or have ceased doing business, plaintiffs have voluntarily dismissed their claims against those defendants with prejudice.   Accordingly, plaintiffs now seek damages only from the Liberty Defendants.

Accenture, LLP, “Employer”, and American Zurich Insurance Company, “Insurer”, by and through their undersigned attorneys, Tony D. Villeral, esq. and Franklin & Prokopik, P.C., hereby submit the District of Columbia does not have jurisdiction over the subject claim pursuant to D.C. Code § 32-1503.

This is a subrogation action arising from a motor vehicle accident that occurred May 1, 2008 on I-20 in Bossier Parish, Louisiana when an east-bound tractor-trailer driven by Enrique Quinones crossed the median and struck a west-bound vehicle driven by Billy Woodall. Plaintiff, Great West Casualty Company, insured Q’s Trucking Company, the owner of the vehicle being driven by Quinones. Great West settled a lawsuit filed by the family of Billy Woodall and brought this subrogation lawsuit to recover payments made in that settlement. Great West sued Bridgestone Americas Tire Operations, LLC (“BATO”) alleging that the Quinones/Woodall accident was caused by the failure of a BATO tire on Q’s Trucking’s vehicle. BATO has denied the claim and

All Claims Repairs provided mitigation work and we understand they are billing you direct as stated previously. All Claims Repairs cleared the line and performed mitigation work which my understanding is they are billing you direct for those services. We have not allowed for items that mitigation contractor removed and have only allowed for replacement and finishing of those items.

Initially, at 1140 hours, the power failed and came back on briefly which then electrical power had been lost all together. All Engineering Department Mission Partners immediately responded to the Power Plant in an attempt to rectify the failure. The Emergency Management Coordinator responded to the main floor of the medical center and met up with hospital administration.

In Maryland, insurance policies are generally construed in the same manner as contracts. Collier v. MD-Individual Practice Ass 'n, Inc., 327 Md. 1, 5, 607 A.2d 537 (1992). An insurance contract, like any other contract, is measured by its terms unless a statute, a regulation, or public policy is violated thereby. Pac. Indem. Co. v. Interstate Fire & Cas. Co., 302 Md. 383, 388, 488 A.2d 486 (1985). We do not follow the rule, adopted in other jurisdictions, that an insurance policy is to be construed most strongly against the insurer. Collier, 327 Md. at 5; Cheney, 315 Md. at 766. We construe the instrument as a whole in order to determine the parties’ intent. Pac. Indem., 302 Md. at 388; Collier, 327 Md. at 5; Aragona v. St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. Co., 281 Md. 371, 375, 378 A.2d 1346 (1977). In order to determine the intention of the parties, “Maryland courts should examine the character of the contract, its purpose, and the facts and circumstances of the parties at the time of execution.” Pac. Indem., 302 Md. at 388 (citations omitted). In doing so, we give the words their usual, ordinary, and accepted meanings. Id.; Mut. Fire Ins. Co. v. Ackerman, 162 Md. App. 1, 5, 872 A.2d 110 (2005) (citing Nationwide Mut. Ins. Co. v. Scherr, 101 Md. App. 690, 695, 647 A.2d 1297 (1994)). The test is what meaning a reasonably prudent layperson would attach to the term. Pac. Indem., 302 Md. at 388.

The issue was that the contract failed to spell out the tax credit secured provisions which relied on the environmental design of the project; additionally, specifically determining roles and duties for each project team member in the project contracts is extremely necessary to successful green-building-project delivery. If there are ambiguities as for varied services or work, problems will instantaneously occur. Indeed, the owner and the prime contractor have signed the contract according to the AIA standard form (A101‑1997) which did not clearly specify the responsibilities associated with the tax credits or specifically determine any green

The workers’ compensation claim detailed the circumstances surrounding an injury that he suffered while at work. He confessed that while working on the job site he sustained severe burns to his lower body. His duties on this day included that he make some repairs to a leaky fuel line. During this process fuel spilled onto his pants. Additionally while making repairs pieces of steel become caught on his pants. Lastly as Mr. Martinez attempted to use a torch to cut free pipe a spark ignited the fuel on his pants. This resulted in burns to his lower body. This injury resulted in him to miss having to miss a considerable amount time from work. He filed a workers compensation to replace part of his lost wages. The suit accused the defendants of failing to maintain a safe work site for its subcontractors and in failing to provide personal protective clothing, personal protective equipment, and firefighting equipment.

All devices and equipment were cleaned and returned to their rightful places and the lab area used was also tidied up.

On arrival they witnessed smoke and flames on the mid level of the building. Two battalion chiefs arrived on scene and one proceeded to set up incident command at the lobby, while the other led fire fighters up the building for fire attack (Routley 8). One of the security guards then informed the chiefs that the fire was on the 22nd floor, and at 2033 battalion chief 5 ordered a second alarm (Routley 8). Due to insufficient fire protection around the utility lines all power was lost to the building (Routley 8). At the loss of primary power the emergency generator didn’t kick in due to improper maintenance it was unable to start (Routley 8). This profoundly impacted the fire operations for the remainder of the incident because the entire building was left without electricity (Routley 8). As stated in the tactical report, “This total power failure had a major impact on the firefighting operations. The lack of lighting made it necessary for firefighters to carry out suppression operations in complete darkness using only battery powered lights. Since there was no power to operate elevators, firefighters were forced to hand carry all suppression equipment including SCBA replacement cylinders up the stairs to the staging area that was established on the 20th floor. In addition, personnel had to climb at least 20 floors

The company also have environmental claims; for personal injury and property damage alleging the release of or exposure to hazardous materials.

Our comprehensive plumbing services include emergency plumbing repairs, installation and maintenance of your entire plumbing system, including the following but not limited to: