“Discovery Rule” Does Not Toll Statute of Limitations in Negligent Procurement Action The Illinois Appellate Court for the First District, in an opinion written by Justice Burke with Justices Lampkin and Reyes concurring, applying Illinois law, held that a two-year statute of limitations applies to a claim for negligent procurement against an agent.  Per Illinois Supreme Court precedent, the two-year... Read More

Aggregate Corridor Deductible Applies Within Limits The Seventh Circuit, in an opinion written by Judge Hamilton, applied Illinois law and affirmed the District Court’s ruling that an Aggregate Corridor Deductible eroded the limits of the excess policy at issue.  The Seventh Circuit used extrinsic evidence to interpret the ambiguous policy provision. Lexington Insurance Company (“Lexington”) and National Union Fire Insurance Company... Read More

Email Scheme Losses Covered Despite Assertions That “Fraudulent Instructions” Didn’t Directly Cause Loss In December 2019, the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals, applying Georgia law, affirmed a decision by the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia, which granted summary judgment to Principle Solutions Group L.L.C. (“PSG”), an information technology company.  The Eleventh Circuit held that Ironshore Indemnity,... Read More

Unspecified Alleged Personal Property Damage in Construction Defect Complaint Sufficient to Trigger Duty to Defend The Illinois Appellate Court for the First District, in an opinion written by Justice Ellis with Justices McBride and Cobbs concurring, applying Illinois, reversed the Circuit Court’s ruling and held that the underlying complaint’s allegations against a contractor relating to damage to personal property constituted... Read More

Multiple Limits of Liability Do Not Render Anti-Stacking Provision Ambiguous In an unanimous decision, the Illinois Supreme Court, applying Illinois law, reversed the lower courts’ judgments and held that a multi-vehicle automobile insurance policy is not so ambiguous that the liability limit for all covered vehicles may be stacked in violation of an anti-stacking policy provision. TJay Klamm caused a serious... Read More

Exception to Special Hazards Exclusion Does Not Affirmatively Create Coverage for Pollution The U.S. District Court of Massachusetts, applying Massachusetts law, granted summary judgement in favor of an insurer and held that a Total Pollution Exclusion barred coverage.  The insured argued that the policy was ambiguous due to an exception to a Special Hazards and Fluids Limitation exclusion, and thus,... Read More

No Coverage for Parking Lot Shooting No defense or indemnity obligations for negligence claims related to parking lot shooting due to exclusion for injuries “arising out of” “assault,” “battery”, or “physical altercation.” The United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, applying Pennsylvania law, held that an insurer had no duty to defend or indemnify a policyholder in an... Read More

“Collapse” in Homeowners’ Policy Requires Proof of Imminent Danger of Residence Falling Down  In a trio of opinions, the Connecticut Supreme Court held that the “substantial impairment” standard for the term “collapse” requires proof of imminent danger of the home falling down.   Moreover, the Connecticut Supreme Court found that a home’s “foundation” unambiguously includes the basement walls of the... Read More

No “Property Damage” or “Bodily Injury” Alleged  The District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, in an opinion by Judge Ronald A. Guzman, applying Illinois law, held that an insurer was not obligated to defend or indemnify its insured for a lawsuit related to adding hidden charges to vending machine transactions.  The underlying lawsuit did not contain allegations that... Read More