Judge Rules Against Harvard in Case on Fumbled Insurance Filing

WASHINGTON — Harvard’s failure to inform an insurance coverage firm that it had been sued over its race-conscious admissions program signifies that it can not use a $15 million coverage to cowl its authorized bills, a federal decide in Boston dominated on Wednesday.

Performing two days after Harvard confronted skeptical questions on the Supreme Court docket about its admissions practices, Choose Allison D. Burroughs of the Federal District Court docket in Boston dominated that “an unambiguous insurance coverage coverage should be utilized as written.”

She stated it was undisputed that Harvard had did not file a well timed formal declare with one in all its insurance coverage corporations, Zurich American Insurance coverage. It didn’t matter, she wrote, that Zurich might have discovered concerning the affirmative motion swimsuit informally.

Days after College students for Truthful Admissions sued Harvard in 2014, arguing that its observe of taking account of race in its undergraduate admissions selections was illegal and harmed Asian American candidates, the college formally notified its main insurance coverage provider to hunt cost of its protection prices. That coverage had a $25 million restrict, after Harvard paid $2.5 million.

However Harvard didn’t alert Zurich, its extra insurer, which was meant to cowl the following $15 million, till lengthy after the coverage’s deadline had handed.

Zurich refused to pay, and Harvard sued. Within the course of, the college disclosed that its authorized charges and bills within the admissions lawsuit and a associated Justice Division investigation had topped $27 million.

Each of Harvard’s insurance coverage insurance policies lined claims made in opposition to it in the course of the one-year interval ending in November 2015, as long as they had been reported to the insurers by January 2016. The Zurich coverage stated that discover to the first insurer didn’t suffice.

Harvard didn’t present formal discover to Zurich till Might 2017, greater than a yr after the deadline.

In courtroom papers, legal professionals for Zurich stated the case was easy. “Harvard’s admitted failure to adjust to the discover provision,” they wrote, “is deadly to its declare for protection.”

In response, Harvard’s legal professionals argued that Zurich “absolutely knew” concerning the affirmative motion swimsuit “within the yr after it was filed, particularly given the numerous, ongoing consideration that the swimsuit acquired in nationwide and native information” and Zurich’s personal underwriting actions.

They added: “The discover requirement will not be an escape hatch for insurance coverage corporations to keep away from legal responsibility to policyholders as a result of technical noncompliance.”

Zurich’s legal professionals stated that argument was “artistic but specious” and “outlandish.”