A New York Democrat on Friday proposed outlawing policy language that insurers use to deny coverage for losses that stem from both insured and excluded causes, legislation inspired by Superstorm Sandy that would nix insurer-friendly precedent in New York and bring it in line with more catastrophe-prone states.
But Marshall Gilinsky, a shareholder at Anderson Kill & Olick PC, said anti-concurrent clauses have a way of sneaking up on policyholders when they're facing losses that they expect to be covered by traditional policies.
Catastrophes like Sandy and Hurricane Katrina have pushed lawmakers to put anti-concurrent clauses under the microscope.
"Unfortunately it takes horrible things like Sandy to highlight the need for things like this," Gilinsky said. "Hopefully, given what we all know happened after Sandy, it's something that's going to have traction in Albany."