Home » Blog » Legal News » Business Law
Will Your Business Interruption Insurance Cover Your COVID-19 Losses?
As businesses continue to shut down across Louisiana and the nation in response to city and state “stay at home” orders, business owners are worried about whether this public health disaster is covered under their business interruption insurance protection plans. If they listen to their insurance agents or the many media articles on the topic, they probably think they are out of luck. However, business owners have nothing to lose by filing a claim to test the waters, and if that claim is denied they always have the option to file a lawsuit to enforce their insurance plan.
Whether your claim is covered or not is likely dependent on the type of policy and the specific language in it. If you have a business that has been affected by closures, check your business policies to see what losses may be covered. Even if your insurance policy contains a specific exclusion related to viruses or pandemics, there are several angles to possibly overcome the exclusions.
Continue reading “Business Interruption Insurance Claims for COVID-19” →
Plaintiff’s drilling barge caught fire causing extensive damage. Repairs were made at a cost of $11 million. Under La. R.S. 47:305.1(A), taxes imposed shall not apply to sales of materials, machinery, and equipment which become component parts of a vessel of fifty tons and over, if the vessel is built in Louisiana. Further, a tax exemption applies to construction or reconstruction, but not to the replacement of worn components. Louisiana law also provides that the exemption applies if the reconstruction restores the vessel to seaworthiness following its destruction by sinking, collision, or fire. Plaintiff relied on this tax exemption and did not pay any sales or use taxes on the materials purchased to repair the barge. Nevertheless, the local tax collector assessed taxes on the repair equipment.
Continue reading “Materials Used to Reconstruct a Vessel Destroyed by Fire are Tax Exempt” →
Plaintiff brought suit against her former employer under Louisiana’s Whistleblower Statute, alleging that she was wrongfully terminated for reporting unsafe work equipment to management and corporate headquarters. Defendant filed an exception of no cause of action, arguing that plaintiff was terminated for failing to follow the proper procedure of reporting the unsafe condition, and that plaintiff did not engage in protected activity under the Whistleblower Statute. Plaintiff argued that her termination was actually in retribution of reporting defendant’s violation of state law, which requires employers to provide reasonably safe employment for all employees. The trial court granted the exception, and plaintiff appealed.
Continue reading “Employee’s Internal Complaint of Faulty Equipment Did Not Give Rise to Whistleblower Protection” →
In a civil suit brought by a former UCLA basketball player, it was alleged that the NCAA profited from the use of Plaintiff’s name and likeness in television broadcasts and video games. Plaintiff contended that because the NCAA enjoys contracts worth billions of dollars, athletes are entitled to a portion of the profits. The NCAA countered that college athletes are by definition amateurs, and further argued the commonly held belief that paying college athletes would transform collegiate athletics into something unrecognizable and render the athletes professionals. In 2014, the District Court for the Northern District of California found that the NCAA was not above the antitrust laws and its rules were too restrictive in maintaining amateurism. The district court proposed that the NCAA allow colleges to pay athletes up to $5,000.00 per year in “deferred compensation.” The NCAA appealed the decision.
Continue reading ““Cost of Attendance” is Sufficient Compensation for College Athletes” →