Legal Digest -Court: $1M coverage for Conn. fire victim families
Law News
Today's Legal News Bookmark This Website
Court: $1M coverage for Conn. fire victim families
Legal World News | 2013/06/11 09:03
Families suing the operator of a Hartford nursing home where 16 patients died in a 2003 fire suffered a setback Monday, when the Connecticut Supreme Court ruled that the home's insurance coverage was $1 million instead of the $10 million claimed by the victims' relatives.

The justices' 3-2 decision reversed a lower court judge's interpretation of Greenwood Health Center's insurance policy in favor of the families. The high court instead found in favor of Boston-based Lexington Insurance Co., a subsidiary of American International Group Inc.

"It just seems completely inadequate," Van Starkweather, an attorney for one victim's family, said about the lower coverage figure. "I'm disappointed. It was a close decision. Three justices went with AIG. Two justices went with the victims."

A lawyer for Lexington Insurance declined to comment Monday.

The fire at Greenwood Health Center on Feb. 26, 2003, broke out after psychiatric patient Leslie Andino set her bed on fire while flicking a cigarette lighter. Officials at the time said it was the 10th deadliest nursing home fire in U.S. history. Andino was charged with 16 counts of arson murder, but was found incompetent to stand trial and committed to a psychiatric hospital.

Relatives of 13 of the 16 victims sued the nursing home's operator for cash damages, saying it failed to adequately supervise Andino. Hartford Superior Court Judge Marshall K. Berger Jr. ruled in 2009 that Greenwood's insurance policy with Lexington provided $250,000 in coverage for each plaintiff and the policy's maximum coverage was $10 million.

But Lexington Insurance appealed Berger's decision, saying that the $10 million was the total coverage for all seven nursing homes run by Greenwood's operator and that each home was insured up to $1 million.

In a decision written by Chief Justice Chase T. Rogers, the Supreme Court's majority found that each plaintiff actually was eligible for up to $500,000 from the insurance policy if they won their lawsuit, but that the policy's total coverage was limited to $1 million.



[PREV] [1] ..[1606][1607][1608][1609][1610][1611][1612][1613][1614].. [2626] [NEXT]
All
Legal News Digest
Law Firm News
Legal Career News
Headline Legal News
Lawyer Blog Updates
Legal Business
Law News
Court Press News
Legal Interview
Legal World News
Press Release
Legal Opinions
Law Firm Marketing
Legal & Political
Law School News
Hungary welcomes Netanyahu and annou..
US immigration officials look to exp..
Trump asks supreme court to halt rul..
Turkish court orders key Erdogan riv..
Trump administration says South Afri..
Austria’s new government is stoppin..
Mexico says it will impose retaliato..
Trump signs order designating Englis..
Trump administration says it’s cutt..
Defense secretary defends Pentagon f..
Musk gives all federal workers 48 ho..
Steve Bannon pleads guilty and avoid..
Officers plead guilty in DWI police ..
Trump signs order imposing sanctions..
A federal judge temporarily blocks T..
Trump suspends US foreign assistance..
Man accused of stalking Caitlin Clar..
Florida Attorney General Ashley Mood..
Prominent human rights attorney quit..
TikTok’s fate arrives at Supreme Co..


   Lawyer & Law Firm Links
Oregon DUI Law Attorney
Eugene DUI Lawyer. Criminal Defense Law
www.mjmlawoffice.com
San Francisco Trademark Lawyer
San Francisco Copyright Lawyer
www.onulawfirm.com
New York Adoption Lawyers
New York Foster Care Lawyers
Adoption Pre-Certification
www.lawrsm.com
 
 
© Legal News Digest. All rights reserved.

Disclaimer: The content contained on the web site has been prepared by Legal News Media as a service to the internet community and is not intended to constitute legal advice or a substitute for consultation with a licensed legal professional in a particular case or circumstance. Blog postings and hosted comments are available for general educational purposes only and should not be used to assess a specific legal situation. | Criminal Defense Attorney Web Design by Law Promo