Case Application Chapters 26 and 27
Question
Using Case Applications that are located at the end of both Chapters 26 and Chapters 27 (be sure you are using the 2020 edition. The first case is about the Lastovica Corporation and the Jones Corp.):
Chapter 26: Complete the Case Application answering the components of #1 and #2. Support with the information from the textbook.
Chapter 27: Complete the Case Application answering the components of the case answering a, b, c, d, and e. Be sure to expand on each component (define) that you answer. Describe (from the textbook) the coverage and why that coverage would support each answer.
Make sure to fully answer each area with supporting information cited within your work. It must be evident that you are applying the concepts of the chapters within your work while internally citing and fully resourcing the textbook.


Solution
Case Application Chapters
26 and 27
Component in Chapter 26
From the case, it is clear that general
commercial liability has the duty to defend the insurer based on demands made
under its policy. Since Jones Corporation and Lastovica Construction are
insured under a commercial general liability policy, Jones Insurance is the
insurer with the duty to defend Lastovica construction against Heather's claim.
As insured, Lastovica Construction needs to know that the potential for
coverage exists under the CGL policy. Having analyzed the duty of every party,
it is clear that to this extent, the duty to defend LC has only potential where
coverage is under contention (Rejda,
2011). CGL has been covering personal or property damage, advertising
injury, and bodily harm for a long time. This means that if Heather sues LC for
bodily harm, the insurance company is responsible for defending LC in court.
The information from the case
indicates that Lastovica was operating a heavy machine on high ground, which
fell, thus causing damage to Heather. From this perspective, Jones Corporation
has a legal way as an insurer to create ground for the argument that LC, as
insured, was Grossly Negligent by failing to attach the heavy machinery. Having
gross negligence on its side LC has an effective way to deny any damage caused
by it to the individual. If the insured is charged with a crime or sued for
damages, the insurer is not responsible for defending them.
In most instances, employers have the
mandate to ensure that the employees and any person who visits its premises are
safe and healthy. This means that as an employer, you must ensure that such
individuals in the company are protected against any occupational hazards and
harm that may risk their health or cause injury by ensuring that there are
mitigated. From this view, it is clear LC has responsibility for the bodily
harm that was caused to Brian. Thus, for that reason, it has to ensure that he
is indemnified by ensuring that it pays for his medical expenses and loss of wages
as he recovers from injuries (Rejda,
2011). As a result, Brian is legally obligated to Lastovica Construction
since it was negligent in providing him with a safe work environment. Also,
given that LC is under CGL, Jones Corporation has the mandate to cover LC costs
because CGL covers personal injury.
The policy terms were active till
December 31, 2017, and the claim by the patient was made on November 12, 2018,
which was almost a year after the policy period. Apart from that, no prior
notice was given by the patient to the Nurse; thus, the company was not liable
to cover the loss.
Components in Chapter 27
Looking at Jennifer's scenario as a
consultant, Scope under Robbery is the appropriate insuring agreement that I
think will cover the loss. It is clear that a Robbery is an unlawful act
involving taking someone's property forcefully (Rejda, 2011). The act of Robbery, in most cases, leads
to a person's bodily; thus, it is essential to cover the loss through scope
under Robbery. Having an appropriate insuring agreement would help Jennifer
replace her money after the incident that saw her render the cash to the
person.
Travis's case has numerous options
that are appropriate given the incident that happened is a commercial crime.
Being a retail crime, several insuring agreements are appropriate that I can advise
the firm include inside the premises. The inside premises is an effective
insurance agreement because it covers theft of money and security from within the
insured's premises.
For the case of Rebecca, the
appropriate insurance agreement is scoped under Robbery. This kind of agreement
is meant to cover unlawful act that aims to threaten or cause harm to the
individual body.
The appropriate insuring agreement
for the firm is employee theft because this type of insurance helps in coverage
of alteration or forgery that employees can do in the company. Given the
dishonesty of the employees, having this insurance coverage agreement will help
the firm have substantial protection from embezzlement.
In this case, the effective insurance
agreement Josh can select is computer fraud or funds transfer fraud. This type
of coverage is essential because it ensures the firm against theft of money or
property by using a computer to send covered property from premises that are
insured to another person.
Reference
Rejda, G. E.
(2011). Principles of risk management and insurance. Pearson
Education India.



About Author
Tough Essay Due? Hire Tough Essay Writers!
We have subject matter experts ready 24/7 to tackle your specific tasks and deliver them ON TIME, ready to hand in. Our writers have advanced degrees, and they know exactly what’s required to get you the best possible grade.
Find the right expert among 500+
We hire Gradewriters writers from different fields, thoroughly check their credentials, and put them through trials.
View all writers