Skip to Main Content
Services Talent Knowledge
Site Search
Menu

Publication

February 28, 2023

Transportation Year in Review

2023 Transportation Annual Year in Review

Barclay Damon’s Transportation Team is pleased to present its annual summary of developments in transportation law, Transportation Annual Year in Review. This year’s review looks at cases decided in 2022 by courts around the country, beginning with decisions regarding the MCS- 90 endorsement. 

Among the most consequential MCS-90 cases of the year was Progressive Commercial Cas. Ins. Co. v. Xpress Transp. Logistics, which confirmed that an MCS-90 endorsement does not require the issuing insurer to negotiate and attempt to settle claims prior to the entry of judgment against the named insured motor carrier. An insurer with actual policy coverage must indeed act in good faith in response to settlement demands and of course has a duty to defend. Where there is no coverage, though, and only an MCS-90 exposure, no such duties exist. 

This critical case and many others that are shaping the landscape and direction of the transportation industry are covered in this year’s review, and we’ll continue to monitor and analyze these cases as they develop. As always, we look forward to hearing from you.

Read more here.
 

Subscribe

Click here to sign up for alerts, blog posts, and firm news.

Featured Media

Alerts

New York State Announces Six-Month Moratorium on Medicaid Enrollment for Certain "High-Risk" Provider Types

Alerts

Battery Energy Storage Is a Public Utility: Westchester Supreme Court Orders Town Zoning Board to Review a BESS Under the Public Utility Variance Standard

Alerts

Effective Immediately: New York Statewide Moratorium on New Data Center Development

Alerts

First Department Reinforces Labor Law § 240(1) Protections Where Defective Ladder Causes Fall Following Electrical Shock

Alerts

New York City and State Bans on Gas Appliances in New Buildings Upheld by the Second Circuit

Alerts

Legal Update: US Supreme Court Resolves Key Fourth Amendment Question in Chatrie v. United States