Search for: "Insurance Companies A,B" Results 4441 - 4460 of 8,130
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
9 Mar 2020, 1:21 pm by Unknown
Companies are responsible for both express and implied claims. [read post]
3 Jan 2007, 10:14 am
Many casualty companies truly act in the best interest of the plaintiffs (emphasis added) in suggesting guaranteed future payments. [read post]
23 Aug 2010, 4:41 pm by Rebecca Shafer, J.D.
You should consult with your insurance broker or agent about workers' comp issues. [read post]
2 Jan 2007, 11:30 am
The insurers didn't want to pay out on the €200 million D&O policy cover, claiming that Schrempp acted with intent and so DaimlerChrysler then sued. [read post]
1 May 2014, 10:42 am by Paul E. Freehling
  An employee found to have committed a violation would be required (a) to pay the company, as “liquidated damages, and not a penalty” all sums the employee received, “directly or indirectly,” as a result of the violation, and (b) to reimburse the company for all costs and expenses, including reasonable attorneys’ fees, incurred in enforcing the agreement. [read post]
11 Mar 2010, 3:18 am
The SRA provided that Bayport-Bluepoint would deduct money from the participant's paycheck and transfer it to Horizon's custodial bank, where the funds would then be distributed by Horizon to the vendor selected by the employee-participant.Significantly, the SRA contains a "Hold Harmless Provision" which provided that "[t]he Employee agrees that the Employer shall have no liability whatsoever for any loss suffered by the Employee with regard to his selection of an… [read post]
13 Jan 2009, 4:17 am
The SRA provided that Bayport-Bluepoint would deduct money from the participant's paycheck and transfer it to Horizon's custodial bank, where the funds would then be distributed by Horizon to the vendor selected by the employee-participant.Significantly, the SRA contains a "Hold Harmless Provision" which provided that "[t]he Employee agrees that the Employer shall have no liability whatsoever for any loss suffered by the Employee with regard to his selection of an… [read post]
20 Aug 2024, 9:01 pm by renholding
The Proposal eliminates the Exclusivity Exception of the basis that it enables an IDI to treat deposits that otherwise would be deemed brokered (e.g., brokered CDs) as not brokered solely because the bank has an exclusive arrangement with the deposit provider—often a fintech company. [read post]
14 Jan 2020, 1:25 pm by Michelle Capezza
  Though existing regulations provide a safe harbor with respect to selection of an annuity provider and a contract for benefits distributions from a defined contribution plan, there remains uncertainty among plan fiduciaries regarding their potential liability in connection with selecting a lifetime income provider such as an insurance company. [read post]
14 Jan 2020, 1:25 pm by Michelle Capezza
  Though existing regulations provide a safe harbor with respect to selection of an annuity provider and a contract for benefits distributions from a defined contribution plan, there remains uncertainty among plan fiduciaries regarding their potential liability in connection with selecting a lifetime income provider such as an insurance company. [read post]
3 Mar 2014, 4:16 am by Kevin LaCroix
(Full disclosure: I own BRK B shares, although not as many as I wish I did.) [read post]
22 Jan 2021, 9:05 pm by Jamison Chung
DTC genetic testing creates the possibility for insurance discrimination that could deter Americans from participating in medical research, Jean-Christophe Bélisle Pipon, Effy Vayena, Robert C. [read post]
18 Nov 2010, 4:34 am by Russell Jackson
Plaintiffs in Katrina were policyholders who sued insurance companies under a Louisiana statute for bad faith in adjusting their Katrina-related insurance claims and not paying plaintiffs what they had claimed within 30 days after the insurers received proof of loss. [read post]