A third district Illinois appellate court, in an opinion written by Judge Jodi M. Hoos, upheld the decision of the circuit court that damage caused from the seepage of below ground water through a floor was excluded under a policy which excluded coverage for damage caused by “water below the surface of the ground.” Central Illinois Compounding, Inc. d/b/a Preckshot... Read More
Illinois Federal Judge John Robert Blakey, applying Illinois law, found that ten underlying actions were related, and thus, based on the policy language, constituted a single “Claim”. Therefore, the policy at issue was exhausted because the insurer had already satisfied the single “Claim” limit. Lloyd’s Syndicate 3624 (“Hiscox”) issued a renewal professional liability and general liability policy to Biological Resource... Read More
The Seventh Circuit, applying Indiana law, upheld the lower court’s opinion that an excess insurer had no duty to indemnify its insured for the insured’s customer’s lost profits that the insured became liable due to the failure of the insured’s product. In making its ruling, the court noted it was possible that the lost profits were covered under the... Read More
Insurers Have An “All Sums” Duty to Defend Long-Tail Claims. A New York Federal Magistrate Judge, applying New York law, issued a Report and Recommendation finding that insurers with a duty to defend a policyholder against asbestos bodily injury claims have an “all sums” duty to pay all defense costs up front. In other words, a pro rata allocation of... Read More
“All Sums” And “Vertical Exhaustion” Apply to Policies Containing Non-Cumulation/Prior Insurance Provisions. A New York Supreme Court, applying New York law, held that the Liquidator for Midland Insurance Company must apply all sums and vertical exhaustion to Midland policies that follow form to policies containing non-cumulation/prior insurance provisions. ASARCO was engaged in the milling and selling of asbestos products. As a... Read More
Prior Known Acts Exclusion Negates Insurer’s Duty to Defend. The U.S. District Court of New Jersey, applying New Jersey law, granted the insurer’s motion for summary judgment and denied the insured’s cross-motion for summary judgment. The Court held that the insurer does not have a duty to defend a public school district from sexual abuse claims under its policy because... Read More
Damage From Defective Product Was “Expected” Despite Negligence Allegations. Illinois district court Judge Elaine E. Bucklo, applying Illinois law, found the mere inclusion of a negligence theory in an underlying complaint could not satisfy a policy’s occurrence requirement where there were no allegations of an unforeseen or accidental event that produced property damage. Thus, while the court found the... Read More
Pro Rata Allocation Not Required in Insurer v. Insurer Contribution Action. An appellate court in Ohio, applying Ohio law, held that National Union Fire Insurance Company of Pittsburgh, PA (“National Union”) was liable for its equitable share of the costs of defending and indemnify its insured, Rust Engineering Company (“Rust”), against thousands of asbestos-related bodily injury claims. The court determined... Read More
Common Interest Doctrine Applicable as Exception to Attorney-Client Privilege in Case Between Insured and its Broker. On interlocutory appeal, the Illinois Appellate Court for the Second District, applying Illinois law, held that the “common-interest” doctrine applies as an exception to the attorney-client privilege when an insured sued its insurance broker for malpractice based on the denial of a claim. Thus,... Read More
Pro Rata Allocation Not Required in Insurer v. Insurer Contribution Action An appellate court in Ohio, applying Ohio law, held that National Union Fire Insurance Company of Pittsburgh, PA (“National Union”) was liable for its equitable share of the costs of defending and indemnify its insured, Rust Engineering Company (“Rust”), against thousands of asbestos-related bodily injury claims. The court determined... Read More
