The University of Pittsburgh v. Lexington Ins. Co., 2016 WL 4991622 (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 16, 2016). District Court granted summary judgment in favor of the insurer based on the policyholder’s failure to provide sufficient notice of a potential claim within the policy period. *

The University of Pittsburgh v. Lexington Ins. Co., 2016 WL 3963104 (S.D.N.Y. July 21, 2016). Successfully opposed a motion for partial summary judgment seeking a declaration that the policyholder provided adequate notice. *

Uffer v. Travelers Cos., Inc., 88 A.D.3d 690 (2nd Dep’t 2011). Appellate court affirmed dismissal of the complaint on the ground of res judicata. *

Port Auth. of N.Y. & N.J. v. Brickman Grp. Ltd., et al., 2018 WL 3145930 (N.Y. Sup. Ct., N.Y. Cty. June 27, 2018). Trial court granted insurer’s motion to dismiss, as the purported additional insured was the sole proximate cause of the underlying injuries and the policy at issue restricted the availability of additional insured coverage to liability for underlying injuries “caused, in whole or in part, by” the named insured’s acts or omissions.