PropertyCasualtyFocus

  • All Topics
  • Contributors
  • About
  • Contact
  • Subscribe
You are here: Home / Archives for Duty to Indemnify

Duty to Indemnify

Eleventh Circuit Holds Course of Construction Exclusion Applies to Water Damage as Project Was Not Fully Complete

March 25, 2025 by Matthew Lewis

In Liberty Surplus Insurance Corp. v. Kaufman Lynn Construction Inc., the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals held that a “course of construction exclusion” in a commercial general liability precluded coverage for water damage caused by a hurricane during a construction project. However, the court found that the insured had standing to assert a claim for reformation of the insurance policy due to mutual mistake, even though the insured was not necessarily making a claim ... Keep Reading »

“Common Sense Should Prevail” — Federal Court Recognizes Exception to “Eight-Corners Rule,” Allows Use of Undisputed Extrinsic Evidence to Preclude Duty to Defend

December 1, 2023 by Lauren Silk

In Southern-Owners Insurance Co. v. Midnight Tires Inc., the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida granted an insurer’s motion for summary judgment after considering extrinsic evidence on the issue of the insurer’s duty to defend in an action seeking a declaration that the insured’s garage general liability policy did not cover claims in an underlying motor vehicle injury lawsuit. In the underlying action, Midnight Tires Inc. was sued in connection ... Keep Reading »

Explosives Manufacturer’s Pollution-Related Claim Blown Up by State-Specific Endorsement

November 20, 2023 by Benjamin Stearns

In Dyno Nobel v. Steadfast Insurance Co., the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals recently held that, under Utah law, where a specific state is listed in an endorsement heading, coverage under the endorsement is limited to claims that have a nexus with that state, so long as such a reading is consistent with the body of the endorsement and policy text. Dyno Nobel is an explosives manufacturer with its principal place of business in Utah. It purchased a commercial general ... Keep Reading »

New York Federal Court Enforces “Third Party or Contracted Security” Exclusion to Abrogate Duty to Defend for All Defendants in Assault Suit

September 29, 2023 by Miguel Rodriguez

In Clear Blue Specialty Insurance Co. v. TFS NY Inc., the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York, interpreting the plain and unambiguous terms of a commercial general liability policy issued by Clear Blue Specialty Insurance Co. to TFS NY Inc., ruled Clear Blue did not have a duty to defend TFS against a suit arising from an alleged assault. TFS does business as Sugardaddy’s and owns and operates a nightclub. The underlying dispute stemmed from a ... Keep Reading »

Cause and Effect: Southern District of Florida Determines Parkland Shooting Constituted One Occurrence

August 28, 2023 by Chad W. Dunham

In the ongoing case of Tony v. Evanston Insurance Co., the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida recently issued a ruling denying a motion to dismiss filed by defendant Evanston Insurance Co. in which it addressed whether multiple shootings originating from a single shooter are treated as separate occurrences or a single occurrence for purposes of coverage under an insurance policy. In the context of insurance coverage cases dealing with shootings, the ... Keep Reading »

Mass. Court Holds Unprovoked Attack Not “Physical Abuse” Within Meaning of Abuse and Molestation Exclusion

April 17, 2023 by Nicole Stone

In Dorchester Mutual Insurance Co. v. Miville, the Supreme Court of Massachusetts discussed the basis for its reversal of the Superior Court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of Dorchester Mutual based on its interpretation of what constitutes “physical abuse” in the context of an abuse and molestation exclusion as it applies to the insured’s unprovoked attack on an individual. The facts regarding the unprovoked attack by the insured, William Brengle, on Leonard ... Keep Reading »

Investment Advisory Firm’s Unlawful Copying and Distribution of Industry Publication to Firm Employees Not Covered by Professional Liability Policy

September 16, 2022 by Benjamin Stearns

A California court recently held that an investment advisory firm’s losses stemming from its alleged copying and distribution of Oil Daily, an energy industry publication, to the firm’s advisers were not covered by investment advisory professional liability policies the firm had procured. Energy Intelligence Group Inc. is the publisher of “newsletters and other publications for the highly-specialized global energy industry,” including Oil Daily. Energy Intelligence ... Keep Reading »

Fifth Circuit Finds Coverage for Untimely Fraudulent Wire Instruction Claim Is Not Barred Under D&O Policy

October 13, 2021 by Benjamin Stearns

The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals recently reversed a ruling that a directors and officers liability policy provided no coverage for an insured financial services firm that fell for a scam involving a fraudulent direction to wire $1 million from one of its customer’s accounts. After the customer threatened to file a negligence suit against the financial services firm, the firm submitted a claim for coverage under its D&O policy. The insurer declined to defend the ... Keep Reading »

PSA: Second Circuit Issues Reminder of the Consequences for Lack of Specificity in Disclaimers of Coverage for Personal Injury Claims Under New York Law

June 25, 2021 by Charles W. Stotter

Photo of a megaphone and dollar bills

We have previously discussed the requirements imposed on insurers by New York law to inform insureds seeking coverage for death or bodily injury to describe any disclaimer of coverage “with a high degree of specificity of the ground or grounds on which the disclaimer is predicated.” In Philadelphia Indemnity Insurance Co. v. Yeshivat Beth Hillel of Krasna Inc., the Second Circuit Court of Appeals recently illustrated the consequences of failing to disclaim with such ... Keep Reading »

Ninth Circuit Flags NFL Stadium Design and Construction as Intentional Conduct Resulting in Out of Bounds Claim for Occurrence Coverage

April 27, 2021 by Novera H. Ahmad

San Francisco Football Stadium

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals recently found that insurers did not have to defend a construction company from the San Francisco 49ers' claim that the company negligently failed to construct the NFL team's stadium to be accessible to all people with physical disabilities. In Hartford Fire Insurance Co. v. Turner/Devcon, the federal appellate court ruled that because the construction of the stadium was an intentional act, it did not constitute bodily injury or ... Keep Reading »

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • …
  • 9
  • Next Page »
Carlton Fields Logo
A blog focused on legal developments in the property-casualty industry by the attorneys of Carlton Fields.

Get Weekly Updates!

Send Me Updates!

Focused Topics

  • Additional Insured
  • Bad Faith
  • Business Interruption
  • Class Action
  • Construction/Builder’s Risk
  • Coronavirus / COVID-19
  • Cybersecurity
  • Declaratory Judgment
  • Duty to Defend
  • Environmental
  • Flood
  • Homeowners
  • Occurrence
  • Pollution/Pollutant
  • Property
  • Regulatory
  • VIEW ALL TOPICS »

Recent Articles

  • Tenth Circuit Interprets Excess Policy’s Definition of “Medical Incident” as Applying to the Injuries of One Single Person
  • Divided Ninth Circuit Finds Claimant’s Failure to Provide Medical Records Insulates Insurer From Bad Faith Failure to Settle
  • Eighth Circuit Finds No Coverage Under “Ensuing Loss” Provision Under Arkansas Law

Carlton Fields

  • carltonfields.com
  • Practices
  • Industries
  • ExpectFocus Magazine

Related Industries/Practices

  • Insurance
  • Financial Lines Insurance
  • Property & Casualty Insurance
  • Financial Services & Insurance Litigation

About PropertyCasualtyFocus

  • All Topics
  • Contributors
  • About
  • Contact
© 2014–2025 Carlton Fields, P.A. · Carlton Fields practices law in California as Carlton Fields, LLP · All Rights Reserved · Privacy Policy · Disclaimer

Carlton Fields publications should not be construed as legal advice on any specific facts or circumstances. The contents are intended for general information and educational purposes only, and should not be relied on as if it were advice about a particular fact situation. The distribution of this publication is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship with Carlton Fields. This publication may not be quoted or referred to in any other publication or proceeding without the prior written consent of the firm, to be given or withheld at our discretion. To request reprint permission for any of our publications, please contact us. The views set forth herein are the personal views of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the firm. This site may contain hypertext links to information created and maintained by other entities. Carlton Fields does not control or guarantee the accuracy or completeness of this outside information, nor is the inclusion of a link to be intended as an endorsement of those outside sites. This site may be considered attorney advertising in some jurisdictions. Web Design by Espo Digital Marketing