The Allocation of Environmental Investigation Costs between the Defense and Indemnity Obligations under General Liability Policies

For policyholders responding to administrative demands of federal or state environmental agencies, the allocation of environmental consultant costs between a carrier's defense and indemnity obligations is a frequent source of disagreement. Likely due to the fact-sensitive nature of such disagreements, existing case law lacks consistency in the analysis of such issues. This article analyzes different legal standards adopted by courts to analyze this issue. Although each court recognizes the fact-intensive nature of the inquiry, some courts are quite detailed in their analysis while others simply seek to achieve a sense of “rough justice.” As a result, attorneys involved in such disputes must have both an understanding of the specific legal standards employed by the courts as well as an understanding of the specific facts that may ultimately tip the scales.     

Are Perceptions of Organizational Justice Universal? An Exploration of Measurement Invariance Across Thirteen Cultures

Previous research examined whether justice effects are comparable, focusing on quantitative differences in justice effects. This study examines whether justice perceptions are structured similarly or whether they are qualitatively different across working populations from 13 nations. Confirmatory factor analysis and multi-group analysis show that Colquitt??s (J Appl Psychol 86:386?C400, 2001) four-dimensional model of justice works well across these samples. However, factor intercorrelations and reliabilities are found to systematically vary between cultural samples. Perceptions of justice are more highly intercorrelated in power distant and collectivistic samples, in line with extensions of the relational model of authority. Score reliabilities were lower in collectivistic settings.