Discusses how to determine whether harassment claims filed in Missouri will be judged under the “contributing” or “motivating” factor standard.
In determining whether a lawyer must report a potential malpractice claim on a professional liability “errors and omissions” renewal or application form, must the insured attorney foresee how Missouri appellate courts would interpret a legal issue never before addressed? Based on a recent Missouri Court of Appeals opinion, the answer seems to be perhaps yes.
In Ruiz v. Bar Plan Mutual Insurance Co., 2019 WL 4145480 (E.D. Mo. 2019)(Sept. 3, 2019), the Missouri Court of Appeals found that an attorney’s failure to notify his legal malpractice carrier of a potential malpractice ...
In the seminal case outlining the contours of permissible civil liability against religious organizations, the Missouri Supreme Court in Gibson v. Brewer made clear that civil courts must not be in the business of analyzing or interpreting religious doctrine and administration. Any such “excessive entanglement” between church and state has the effect of inhibiting religion, which of course would violate the First Amendment. For this reason, Missouri courts are precluded from reviewing questions of hiring, ordaining, and retention of clergy in religious organizations ...
The Missouri Court of Appeals, Southern District, issued an opinion on Jan. 31, 2018, in Shelter Mutual Insurance Company v. Lester that allowed stacking of full auto liability coverage policy limits on four separate policies. The underlying matter involved bodily injury claims brought by multiple claimants. Each of the auto insurer’s liability policies had applicable bodily injury limits of $50,000 per person / $100,000 per accident. Each policy also had the following anti-stacking provision:
If more than one policy issued by Shelter Mutual Insurance Company or Shelter ...
