9/11 Claims Not Barred By Absolute Pollution Exclusion: Claims by clean-up workers at WTC site not barred by an absolute pollution exclusion for various reasons, including allegations that the defendant did not provide adequate work-place protections (NY Fed).
A New York federal court refused to apply the absolute pollution exclusion to bar a defense for lawsuits brought by 9/11 clean-up workers,... Read More
Asbestos – Each Claim An Occurrence / 3 Year Policy = 3 Separate Limits: The decision to sell asbestos-containing products is not a single occurrence under a CGL policy, and a three year policy provides three sets of annual aggregate limits (OH, St.).
An Ohio State Court judge found that the decision to manufacture and sell an asbestos-containing product is not... Read More
Asbestos Insurance Recovery focuses on locating and identifying historical liability insurance policies to provide coverage for your company’s current asbestos and environmental claims. CGL and other commercial policies up until 1986 did not contain asbestos exclusions. These policies typically provided “occurrence” based coverage, which means that they still pay for “bodily injury” claims that don’t manifest until decades later. ... Read More
Overturning a trial court ruling, a Florida Court of Appeals held the “your products” exclusion barred coverage for defective doors and windows manufactured by the policyholder. The trial court had found the exclusion inapplicable because the product was materially altered by the addition of transoms instead finding that they did not materially change the inherent function and nature of... Read More
A Texas federal court applied an absolute pollution exclusion (“Total Pollution Exclusion Endorsement”) in a Commercial General Liability Policy to bar defense coverage for a Louisiana third-party pollution claim rejecting the argument that the exclusion did not apply because it did not specifically exclude a defense for the storage, transportation and handling of contaminants. The court found that the... Read More
Fidelity insurer’s employee dishonesty exclusion does not automatically apply when executives take out $5.4M in fraudulent loans for their personal benefit (5th Cir. Fed.).
The Federal 5th Circuit Court of Appeals found that a fidelity insurance policy may have to respond when executives take out a $5.4M in fraudulent loans under their company’s name and keep the proceeds despite an... Read More