PropertyCasualtyFocus

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

Exclusions/Exceptions

Drive, He Said: When “Yes” Means “Don’t Shoot!”

September 17, 2014 by John W. Herrington

Picture of a Shotgun Shell Ejecting

Bad things can happen to innocent people, and sometimes the people responsible for them are judgment-proof.  When that happens—and when the perpetrator also has potential coverage under an automobile or homeowners policy—victims sometimes view the circumstances of their injury more generously; they describe them with words like "careless" and "negligent" in place of harsh, judgmental terms, such as "intentional" or "criminal." Something of this sort seems to have been ... Keep Reading »

If Rainwater Lands Where it Doesn’t Belong, It’s Still “Surface Water” in the Eleventh Circuit

September 4, 2014 by Heidi Hudson Raschke

Picture of Granite Falls

The Eleventh Circuit recently affirmed a decision of the Southern District of Georgia, finding an insured’s claim for water damage fell within an exclusion for loss or damage caused by "surface water." In Williams v. State Farm Fire and Casualty Insurance Company, Case No. 14-11100 (11th Cir. July 17, 2014), the dispute arose after the insured’s home was damaged by "thigh deep" water runoff from a rainstorm.  The water should have flowed away from the plaintiff’s home, ... Keep Reading »

Fifth Circuit Holding Breathes Life Back Into the Contractual Liability Exclusion

August 14, 2014 by Meredith Whigham Caiafa

Picture of a CPR Test Dummy

Liability insurance policies typically exclude coverage for obligations arising out of the insured’s "assumption of liability in a contract or agreement."  Earlier this year, the Texas Supreme Court took a narrow view of this exclusion:  in the landmark decision in Ewing Construction Co. v. Amerisure Insurance Co., 420 S.W.3d 30 (Tex. 2014), the court held that a contractor’s agreement to perform construction work "in a good and workmanlike manner" did not assume any ... Keep Reading »

The Meth Business is Dangerous; (En)trust No One

August 12, 2014 by John C. Pitblado

Picture of Handcuffed Hands

For a landlord, it’s a bad day when your tenant gets busted for operating a meth lab, and the local authorities condemn your house because it’s contaminated with the byproducts of his business.  It’s even worse when you learn there is no coverage for the cost of cleaning up the contamination. Neighborhood Investments, LLC, leased a house in Louisville, Kentucky, to a Mr. Kenneth McCormick. As neighborhood investments go, this was not a winner.  Mr. McCormick was ... Keep Reading »

Is There a Duty to Defend Pollution Claims? It’s the Complaint, Stupid

July 15, 2014 by Heidi Hudson Raschke

Picture of Pollution

This Spring, cases from Florida and Wisconsin reaffirmed the general proposition that a liability insurer’s duty to defend must be determined from the specific claims in the underlying complaint against the insured, and not from facts available from other sources.  Both cases dealt with contamination or pollution conditions, and, in both instances, the courts held it was the nature of the underlying claim, rather than the actual presence of a pollutant, that established ... Keep Reading »

On Remand, District Court Expands Subcontractor Exception to Rule Against Coverage for Faulty Workmanship

May 1, 2013 by John C. Pitblado

Recent decisions from the U.S. Courts of Appeal for the Tenth and Second Circuits have partially overturned a longstanding rule against coverage for faulty workmanship under commercial general liability policies.  The rule, known as the “fortuity doctrine,” was based on insuring clauses that provided coverage only for claims arising out of an “occurrence,” and which defined “occurrence” to mean “accident.”  For many years, courts held that claims based on the insured’s ... Keep Reading »

In Faulty Workmanship Cases, Insuring Clause Dogs are Wagged by Exclusion Tails

April 1, 2013 by John C. Pitblado and Robert D. Helfand

In Greystone Const., Inc. v. National Fire & Marine Ins. Co., 661 F.3d 1272, 1289 (10th Cir. 2011), the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit articulated an important rule for construing commercial general liability policies: [A] CGL policy ‘begin[s] with a broad grant of coverage, w[hich is then limited in scope by exclusions.  Exceptions to exclusions narrow the scope of the exclusion and . . . add back coverage.  But it is the initial broad grant of ... Keep Reading »

As Gunfire Thins the Ranks of the Employed, Employee Exclusions Hold the Line Against Coverage

March 28, 2013 by John W. Herrington

As this blog has previously reported, accidents with guns are not likely to become less common any time soon.  With home- and business-owners striving to find increasingly original ways to get shot, they will put increasing strain on the traditional language of the coverage exclusions in insurance policies.  In Gear Automotive v. Acceptance Indemnity Insurance Company, No. 12-2446 (8th Cir. Mar. 18, 2013), the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit recently ... Keep Reading »

Too Much of a Good Thing: Household Product Triggers Pollution Exclusion, Because “Quantity Matters”

March 22, 2013 by John C. Pitblado

Pollution exclusion clauses began appearing in commercial general liability policies when federal laws began making businesses liable for the cost of massive environmental clean-ups—like the remediation of “Volatile Organic Compounds” that was recently at issue in Chubb Custom Ins. Co. v. Space Systems/Loral, Inc., No. 11-16272 (9th Cir. March 15, 2013).  A recent Colorado case presented the issue of when the grease that goes into your bacon double cheeseburger becomes a ... Keep Reading »

Amid Gun Frenzy, West Virginia Court Pries Coverage Issue From the Jury’s Hands

March 7, 2013 by John W. Herrington

Since President Obama called for new gun-control legislation after the Sandy Hook tragedy, sales of weapons have spiked and government officials have proposed a variety of new measures to encourage —or even mandate —gun training and ownership.  In a development that is arguably unrelated to this increase in the number of people handling firearms, accidental shootings have occurred at gun shows and ranges, in gun stores and even during gun certification training courses.  ... Keep Reading »

  • « Previous Page
  • 1
  • …
  • 12
  • 13
  • 14
  • 15
  • 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