Comcast Fighting en Banc Rehearing Petition in Insurance Fight
A reversal of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals decision in a fight over insurance coverage of a TV production would mean ignoring the undisputed meaning of the "warlike action" exclusion in insurance, giving Hamas legitimacy of a sovereign…
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Timely, relevant coverage of court proceedings and agency rulings involving tariffs, classification, valuation, origin and antidumping and countervailing duties. Each day, Trade Law Daily subscribers receive a daily headline email, in-depth PDF edition and access to all relevant documents via our trade law source document library and website.
or blaming Israel for provoking Hamas, plaintiff-appellant Comcast's Universal Cable Production, said Wednesday. In its opposition (in Pacer, docket 17-56672) to defendant-respondent Atlantic Specialty Insurance's petition for panel rehearing and rehearing en banc (see 1908260060), Comcast said Atlantic never rebutted the argument that the "warlike action" exclusion doesn't encompass terrorist actions by terrorist organizations. Atlantic seeks rehearing of a 9th Circuit ruling that reversed and remanded a U.S. District Court's summary judgment decision in the insurer's favor.