We have previously written on the evolving risks associated with PFAS—also known as “forever chemicals”—and their implications for policyholders navigating environmental liabilities involving both PFAS and PFAS-related chemicals (i.e., fluorinated chemicals that do not fit the definition of PFAS). Our prior analyses explored coverage strategies and regulatory enforcement trends. With regulatory activity and litigation continuing to accelerate, we are circling back to provide an updated look at the regulatory and legal landscape surrounding PFAS, including recent federal developments, insurer responses and practical guidance for policyholders navigating this complex and high-stakes area. To meet these risks, policyholders with potential exposure are well advised to review their general liability coverages, including both historical occurrence-based policies, pollution legal liability policies and any new terms added to current renewals.
Insurance Coverage Considerations for Tariff and Trade-Related Losses
Since President Trump took office on January 20, 2025, the administration has implemented significant changes to U.S. trade policy, including most notably with respect to tariffs. Within weeks of taking office, the White House announced changes to tariffs on steel and aluminum which placed a tariff of 25% on all such imports. New tariffs were also separately imposed on imports from Canada, Mexico and China subject to certain exceptions. Then, on April 2, President Trump announced “reciprocal” tariffs on most imports from most countries, branding the day as “Liberation Day” and one of “American industry rebirth.” These tariffs, which include a 10% baseline rate and higher specific tariffs targeting China, Vietnam and the EU, among others, prompted heightened concerns about a trade war. Then, on April 9, President Trump announced that although the 10% baseline reciprocal tariff will remain effect, the higher reciprocal tariffs will be postponed for 90 days—except for China, for which the reciprocal tariff and duties are being increased to 105%, which are being applied in addition to prior 20% duties and the Section 301 duties.
How Trump’s DEI Rollback Affects Nonprofits and How to Protect Your Organization
Since taking office, President Trump has issued sweeping executive orders targeting Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) initiatives across federal agencies and directing agencies to take action to encourage private organizations to follow suit. On January 20, 2025, President Trump signed executive orders (EOs) titled Ending Racial and Wasteful Government DEI Programs and Preferencing and Extremism and Restoring Biological Truth to the Federal Government. The following day, he issued another EO titled Ending Illegal Discrimination and Restoring Merit-Based Opportunity. On January 22, 2025, the White House published a Fact Sheet providing guidance related to these orders. Many states were early adopters of such initiatives—e.g., in 2023 Florida passed a bill banning DEI initiatives in public colleges—or are now following suit in dismantling these programs as well within state agencies and institutions (such as Indiana, Mississippi, West Virginia, among others).
The Ninth Circuit Wants Everyone to Stop Forgetting About the Appraisal Provision
Policyholders, don’t lose track of the appraisal provision in your insurance policies. At least that is what the panel in 50 Exch. Terrace LLC v. Mt. Vernon Specialty Ins. Co. seemed to be saying. There, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the district court’s dismissal of policyholder-plaintiff’s case for non-payment of policy benefits due to lack of ripeness and standing.
Three-Dimensional Chess: Harmonizing Dispute Resolution Clauses in Commercial Insurance Programs
Considering the complex structure of commercial insurance programs—typically purchased in annual “towers” of insurance—risk managers and in-house counsel often do not pay sufficient attention to arbitration-related provisions, which the insurance industry is more frequently including in its policies. That’s like playing only one board in a game of three-dimensional chess. Discrepancies among such provisions can lead to obstacles policyholders later must surmount when coverage disputes arise. This article highlights critical issues to consider and offers recommendations to avoid these obstacles wherever possible.
Southern California’s Wildfire Disaster: Immediate Insurance Considerations
As of January 13, Southern California’s ongoing wildfires have reportedly destroyed more than 12,000 structures. Insured loss estimates exceed $25 billion, and the strong Santa Ana winds fanning the blazes are expected to continue into Wednesday.
Contra Proferentem: Can Insureds Be Forced to Waive Its Protection?
Contra proferentem is a foundational legal principle with particular importance in insurance law. It mandates that any ambiguities in an insurance policy are construed against the insurer and in favor of the insured. The doctrine recognizes that insurance policies generally are contracts of adhesion, in which the insurer wields the “power of the pen,” and the insured is invited to accept the terms of the pre-written agreement with little to no alteration. Contra proferentem mitigates the inherent inequality of an arrangement where insurers generally have sole drafting authority and insureds, often with limited bargaining power, must accept the insurers’ terms as written. By resolving ambiguities in those terms against the insurer, courts are able to counterbalance some of this inequity and find coverage for policyholders.
Avoiding a Coverage Glitch: Closing Potential Gaps in Cyber Insurance Coverage
Over the past decade, technological innovations have quickly transformed how companies operate their IT infrastructure. Traditional on-site servers and hardware have often been replaced or supplemented by off-site solutions such as cloud computing, SaaS (Software-as-a-Service), virtualized servers, or “Bring Your Own Device” (BYOD) programs. These developments allow a business’s IT operations to be spread across a complex IT ecosystem rather than confined to physical devices located on its premises. They have the potential to reduce costs while expanding the computing capabilities at a company’s fingertips.
Fifth Circuit Reminds Policyholders to Be “Not Less Than” Careful When Drafting Master Service Agreements
Just as the oilfield fuels the modern economy, master service agreements (MSAs) fuel the modern oilfield. But while almost every MSA contains indemnity and insurance clauses, experienced oilfield lawyers will advise their clients that no two are identical. Determining how these unique contractual provisions apply to losses and interact with available liability coverage is a nuanced process that frequently results in litigation.