No Coverage For Malpractice Suit Where Insured Misrepresented Prior Knowledge Of Potential Claim

A Connecticut state court has held that an insurer owes no coverage to an insured law firm that misrepresented its prior knowledge of a potential malpractice claim to be filed by a former client. Evans & Lewis, LLC v. Nat'l Liab. & Fire Ins. Co., 2024 WL 3579684 (Conn. Super. Ct. July 22, 2024).

The claims-made professional liability policy included a prior knowledge condition, whereby coverage was potentially available only if "[a]s of the continuous insurance start date no Insured knew or reasonably should have known of any same or related wrongful act, legal service, fact, circumstance or adverse outcome that might result in a claim." In a premium indication form and in a supplemental warranty letter completed prior to the coverage period, the insured law firm checked boxes indicating "no" to questions asking whether the firm or its attorneys had been involved in the past five years in "a claim, potential claim, suit, disciplinary matter or grievance arising