Primary Non Contributory Endorsement Isohunt

Posted on by

Many of us who “do” agreements, such as a lease, were seemingly trained by Admiral David Glasgow Farragut, “remembered for his order at the Battle of Mobile Bay (in which he was victorious) usually paraphrased as ‘Damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead’ in U.S. Navy tradition.” [Thank you, Wikipedia.] How so? Well, we all like to jump in there and use terms of art, not our own, as if we understand those terms.

Try, insurance terms. Biografi mahmud yunus. This will be a primer on the meaning or concept behind the insurance term: “primary and noncontributory.” [Yes, for those who are wondering, “primer” and “primary” both share the common Latin root: Prīmārius, meaning “of first rank.”] That’s helpful information because, as should become clear, the essence of what is behind “primary and noncontributory” is priority of payment, which insurance carrier pays first. Not “pays all,” but “pays first.” Yes, the “primary” in “primary and noncontributory” doesn’t mean “the most important”; it means it, the “primary” carrier, pays first. With that start, Ruminations is going to “back into” the bottom line” by explaining some related concepts.

Primary Non Contributory Endorsement Cg

The endorsement states the liability policy to which it is attached is primary insurance. In other words, the coverage afforded by the additional insured endorsement is primary. If a claim occurs that is covered by both this policy and the additional insured's policy, the insurer will pay the loss without waiting for the additional insured's insurance to pay.

[By the way, “short’ was for last week.] [BEFORE WE DO THAT, HERE IS A NOTE TO REGULAR READERS: If you read our April 3, 2016 blog posting about the Internal Revenue Service’s position on the tax treatment of loans with a non-recourse carve-out guarantor, then you’ll want to look again. Twelve days after we described how the IRS was creating havoc for partnerships and limited liability companies that borrowed money under non-recourse loans, the Service backtracked. You can read about that by returning to the newly annotated, original blog posting by clicking:.] Now, back to our regular programming. But, first, we feel compelled to drag out a well-worn caveat.

Primary Non Contributory Endorsement For Manufacturers

Non

No one, not even our refined Ruminations writing staff, will become an insurance expert just by reading today’s blog posting. There really are experts out there, and that includes a small percentage of insurance professionals.

Take one to lunch. Memorize her or his phone number. Don’t be so vain as to believe you don’t need such an expert in your back pocket.

Some of us may have learned our trade by watching every episode of L.A. Law, but there has been no comparable television program about risk managers at work. So, we’ve told you that “primary” comes from the Latin root: Prīmārius and that means of first rank. When you are in first rank, you come ahead of everyone. That is, “rank” in its sense of: “a row, line, or series of things or persons.” That was painless, but what about “noncontributory”? For that we need to explain what the law means by “contribution.” It has nothing to do with charity because, in the sense we are interested in, it isn’t a voluntary payment; it is one that someone is entitled to collect. We’ll try to explain by use of examples, and cool it on the legal jargon.

Example Primary Non Contributory Endorsement

When, in a single accident, two or more people are responsible for hurting someone, they are both liable for the ensuing damages. We’ll call those injury-causing people, “tortfeasors” (because that’s what the law calls them). In most places (with some technical differences jurisdiction to jurisdiction), they are “jointly and severally” liable to pay those damages. Without elaboration, that means that the injured person doesn’t have to go from tortfeasor to tortfeasor and collect 50% from one and 50% from another (or whatever the percentage of fault might have been). The injured person can drain the bank account of any one or more of them and let the tortfeasors settle up among themselves. [There are some jurisdictions that have “thresholds” of percentage of fault before the “joint” part of “joint and “several” liability kicks in, but that’s for a tort law blogger to explain.] Why did we tell you about joint tortfeasors?

That’s because the right of a joint tortfeasor who paid more than its percentage share of fault can force the other joint tortfeasor(s) to belly up to the bar and “CONTRIBUTE” its share by reimbursing the one whose bank account was tapped. Now, we need readers to take a leap of faith and accept the following. When two or more insurance companies step in for their insureds and pay a liability claim, those companies, by law, are entitled to “contribution” from each other so that, at the end of the day, each pays only its proportionate share of the total settlement or judgment amount. Take note that we didn’t say that they have this right to reach proportionality based on any rights their own insureds may have. The right of an “overpaying” insurance company to get an “even-up” payment from another insurance company that didn’t cover its own policy holder’s proportional liability is the insurance company’s own right. It isn’t a function of its policy holder’s right. Why is that important?