In Film Allman, LLC v. New York Marine and General Insurance Company, Inc., 2:14-cv-7069-ODW, (C.D. Cal. May 23, 2017), a California district court granted summary judgment in favor of an insurer of a production company. The court found no breach and no extra-contractual damages were warranted because the insurer paid full policy limits to settle the claims. Midnight Rider The insurance coverage dispute arose after production company Film Allman, LLC was sued as a ... Keep Reading »
General Liability
Shot Through the Heart, But the Excess Carrier Isn’t to Blame: Georgia Federal Court Finds Policy’s Broad Firearms Exclusion Bars Coverage
On June 1, 2017, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia granted summary judgment in favor of AIG Specialty Insurance Co. in a case involving the application of the firearms exclusion in Powe v. Chartis Specialty Insurance Co., No. 1:16-CV-01336. The court dismissed the case, in which claimant Christopher Powe sought the remaining $3 million of a $4 million settlement against the insureds, property management company HMI Property Solutions, Inc. ... Keep Reading »
Connecticut Appellate Court Addresses Trigger, Allocation, Exclusions, and Other Issues of First Impression in Coverage Litigation Over Long-Latency Asbestos Injury Cases
Connecticut’s intermediate appellate court addressed a number of novel issues in a wide-ranging opinion regarding primary and excess insurers’ respective duties to defend and indemnify their common insured for long-tail asbestos-related injury claims. The opinion was rendered unanimously and authored collectively by the three-judge panel of Robert Beach, Douglas Lavine, and Stuart Bear (ret.). The case, styled R.T. Vanderbilt Company, Inc. v. Hartford Accident and ... Keep Reading »
Multiple Instances of Defectively Designed, Manufactured, or Installed Windows Does Multiple Occurrences Make
After previously holding that various claims against the insured, Pella, alleged property damage caused by an “occurrence,” thus triggering Liberty Mutual Insurance Company’s (“Liberty”) coverage obligations under various CGL policies, in Pella Corp. v. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co., No. 4:11-cv-00273 (S.D. Mar. 31, 2017), the Southern District of Iowa was then tasked with determining the number of “occurrences.” Pella purchased annual liability policies – CGL policies (with ... Keep Reading »
A Stitch in Time Saves … An Insured From Incurring Non-Covered Defense Costs
Timely notice is typically a condition precedent to coverage under an insurance contract, though many states require an insurer to demonstrate prejudice before denying coverage solely based on a failure to comply with a notice provision. However, as the court found in EmbroidMe.com, Inc. v. Travelers Property Casualty Company of America, No. 14-10616 (11th Cir. Jan. 9, 2017), even in the absence of demonstrable prejudice to an insurer, late notice by the insured may ... Keep Reading »
Third Circuit Affirms Rescission of $25 Million Contaminated Products Policy
In H.J. Heinz Co. v. Starr Surplus Lines Ins. Co., No. 16-1447 (3d Cir. Jan. 11, 2017), the Third Circuit affirmed a District Court’s order allowing insurer Starr Surplus Lines Insurance Company (“Starr”) to rescind a $25 million Contaminated Products Insurance (CPI) policy that it sold to food manufacturer H.J. Heinz Company (“Heinz”), on the basis that Heinz failed to disclose material information in its insurance application. After Starr declined coverage, Heinz ... Keep Reading »
Subcontractor Exception Torpedoes Insurers’ Defense To Faulty Workmanship Claim
As this blog has reported, a line of cases deciding coverage disputes over faulty workmanship runs against (or, at least, around) a basic rule for interpreting insurance policies. Under that rule, the scope of coverage is determined by a policy’s insuring clause, which may be narrowed by one or more exclusions. Exceptions to the exclusions can add back coverage that the exclusions remove, but they cannot create coverage beyond the ambit of the insuring clause. E.g., ... Keep Reading »
Look, up in the sky! It’s a bird, it’s a plane, it’s… uh oh… a Super Lien!
Liability insurers have always gnashed teeth over the dreaded “super lien” – aka a lien asserted by Medicare for treatment expenses where the patient is reimbursed through a settlement obtained in personal injury litigation. This is because Medicare has a right of action against the primary payer (e.g., a tortfeasor’s liability insurer) that is effectively absolute, even if the insurer has already paid settlement funds to the injured party that includes an amount meant ... Keep Reading »
Tenth Circuit Drills Down Into Roots Of Moral Hazard, Comes Up Dry
Moral hazard (one of this blog’s preoccupations) usually comes up in disputes over the scope of coverage under an insurance policy. (See, for example, here, here and here.) But state legislatures often address it, too—for example, by imposing limits on agreements to indemnify a party against the consequences of its own negligence. This week, in Lexington Ins. Co. v. Precision Drilling Co., No. 15-8036 (10th Cir. July 26, 2016), the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth ... Keep Reading »
Third Circuit Slams The Door On Coverage For The Cost of Defending Excluded Claims—Then Leaves It Wide Open
An insured corporation settles a class action, and a portion of the settlement pays the plaintiffs’ attorneys. Payments to the class are excluded from coverage under the terms of the corporation’s liability policy. But can the company still get coverage for the attorneys’ fees? In April, this blog discussed a case in which the answer turned on the nature of the company’s underlying conduct. The following month, in PNC Financial Services Group, Inc. v. Houston Casualty ... Keep Reading »
- « Previous Page
- 1
- …
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- …
- 11
- Next Page »