PropertyCasualtyFocus

  • All Topics
  • Contributors
  • About
  • Contact
  • Subscribe
You are here: Home / Archives for Excess

Excess

Tenth Circuit Interprets Excess Policy’s Definition of “Medical Incident” as Applying to the Injuries of One Single Person

May 9, 2025 by Madison E. Wahler

On May 2, 2025, the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals issued an opinion in AdHealth Limited v. PorterCare Adventist Health Systems affirming the lower court’s summary judgment ruling that a hospital’s excess liability insurance policies’ definition of “medical incident” unambiguously applies to the injuries of a single person, not the treatment of multiple people exposed to the same conditions. As a result, each claim for a “medical incident” must individually exceed the ... Keep Reading »

New Jersey Court Holds Primary Home Insurer Must Cover Dog Bite Injury at Insured’s Second Home

February 20, 2024 by Novera H. Ahmad

In Berardi v. FMI Insurance Co., a panel of New Jersey’s Superior Court, Appellate Decision, affirmed a lower court’s ruling, which ordered a primary home insurer to defend its insured in a dog bite lawsuit, stemming from alleged injuries sustained by a house cleaner at the insured’s secondary home. Background and Underlying Action The plaintiffs, Anthony and Janet Berardi, own a primary residence in Sparta, New York, along with a second home in Montauk, New York. ... Keep Reading »

Second Circuit Gives Lesson in Interplay Between Construction Contracts and CGL/Umbrella Policies

July 28, 2023 by Amanda Proctor

On construction projects, it is common for the owners, general contractors, and subcontractors to execute various contracts requiring the parties to procure insurance and have other parties designated as additional insureds under those policies. Recently, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals in Amerisure Insurance Co. v. Selective Insurance Group Inc. addressed the interplay between construction contracts and commercial general liability and umbrella policies. The case ... Keep Reading »

Fifth Circuit Affirms Finding of No Coverage for Phished Funds Never “Held” by Insured

February 1, 2022 by Gregory Gidus

Credit Card Phishing Cybersecurity Hack

As we previously reported, in February 2021, a Texas federal court ruled that RealPage Inc. was not entitled to insurance coverage for funds diverted in an email phishing scheme because RealPage did not "hold" the diverted funds. The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals has now weighed in, agreeing that RealPage never "held" the diverted funds as required by the policy and affirming the district court's decision. In 2018, a RealPage employee clicked on a phishing email ... Keep Reading »

Ninth Circuit Adopts General Rule Regarding Circumstances in Which Excess Insurers May Dispute Exhaustion of Underlying Insurance

November 13, 2020 by Alex B. Silverman

Addressing an issue of first impression, the Ninth Circuit recently adopted a general rule that will sharply limit the ability of excess insurers to second-guess payment decisions made by lower-level insurers. Subject to limited exceptions, the court concluded that an excess carrier generally cannot challenge decisions underlying insurers made with respect to earlier, unrelated claims, as a basis for arguing that its own layer of coverage has not yet been reached.  AXIS ... Keep Reading »

Pennsylvania Federal Court Refuses to Dismiss Bad Faith Claim, Even Though Insurer Timely Made Demanded Payments

April 8, 2020 by Gregory Gidus

Empty Pockets

There have been more developments in Ironshore Specialty Insurance Co. v. Conemaugh Health System Inc., the case brought by Ironshore, as excess carrier, to seek reimbursement of amounts paid in an underlying medical malpractice settlement. While we previously reported that the court denied Conemaugh's (the insured's) motion to dismiss, the court has now also ruled that Conemaugh's counterclaims for bad faith can move forward, despite the fact that Conemaugh did not ... Keep Reading »

Eleventh Circuit Rejects Insurer-Defended Policyholder’s Bid to Expand Florida’s Bad Faith “Excess Judgment Rule” to Include Collusive Settlements Concocted Without Insurer’s Consent

November 22, 2019 by Gregory Gidus

In Cawthorn v. Auto-Owners Insurance Co., No. 18-12067 (11th Cir. Oct. 25, 2019), the Eleventh Circuit affirmed the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida’s grant of summary judgment in favor of Auto-Owners Insurance Co., ruling that a consent judgment does not constitute an excess verdict, which is an essential element of a Florida bad faith claim. This appeal arose from an April 2014 underlying automobile accident in which David Cawthorn and Bradley ... Keep Reading »

New York State Court Affirms All-Sums Allocation Method

June 28, 2019 by Rachel Schwartz

Danger: Asbestos Hazard

A New York state court explored the proper allocation method for insurance policies with non-cumulation clauses covering asbestos exposure loss occurring over the course of multiple successive policy periods in In re Liquidation of Midland Insurance Co. At issue were four excess policies issued by Midland to ASARCO LLC, which, through one of its subsidiaries, engaged in the selling of asbestos products. A series of asbestos claims against ASACRO ensued, and ASARCO sought ... Keep Reading »

Beware Of The Warranty – Second Circuit Relies On Terms Of Warranty, Not Policy, To Make Coverage Determination

January 18, 2019 by Andrew Daechsel

Can the terms of a warranty impact the scope of coverage provided by an insurance policy even if the policy does not explicitly incorporate the terms of the warranty? The answer to this question appears to be yes, at least under New York law, according to the recent decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in Patriarch Partners, LLC v. Axis Ins. Co., No. 17-3022, 2018 WL 6431024 (2d Cir. Dec. 6, 2018). Insured Issues Warranty To Insurer Related To ... Keep Reading »

An Absolute Pollution Exclusion: Reading the ‘Fine’ Print

July 27, 2018 by Kelley Godfrey

Rock Quarry

A federal judge recently relied on a pollution exclusion to find that Great American Insurance Company was not obligated to cover losses associated with the unintended distribution of rock fines into New Jersey’s Spruce Run reservoir. In Great American Ins. Co. v. ACE American Ins. Co., No. 4:18-CV-114-A (N.D. Tex. Jul. 10, 2018), the Northern District of Texas examined the scope of an absolute pollution exclusion and found that it applied to bar coverage, despite the ... Keep Reading »

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 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