The United States Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit, applying Florida law, denied Continental Insurance Company’s motion requesting publication of the Court’s March 20, 2014 opinion, which applied an exception to the general rule that requires a court to only refer to the underlying complaint and compare the facts within it to the language of the insurance policy... Read More
The California Supreme Court found that Hartford was not obligated to provide a defense or indemnity to its policyholder for alleged implicit disparagement of a competitor’s products under its advertising liability coverage.
Hartford issued a CGL policy to Ultimate Support Systems (Ultimate) that covered “personal and advertising injury” including claims arising from “[o]ral, written, or electronic publication of material that... Read More
A Washington Court of Appeals held that an explicit or implicit threat of immediate and severe consequences by a government agency triggers an insurers’ duty to defend “any suit;” however, it ruled that in the present case, the agency action was not adversarial and, therefore, did not trigger the duty to defend.
A gas station owner voluntarily reported contamination and... Read More
The United States 11th Circuit Court of Appeals, applying Alabama law, affirmed the district court’s ruling for the insurer against coverage and against bad faith damages. The insurer issued commercial general liability coverage to the policyholder between 1967 and 1984. In 2008-2009, the policyholder received a CERCLA information request, a formal notice of potential liability, and a draft administrative... Read More
The Illinois First District Appellate Court rejected a settling insurer’s attempt to deselect itself and target tender the policyholder’s other available coverage, based on assignment of this right by the policyholder in the settlement agreement.
The court held thatAmco Insurance Company could not force Cincinnati Insurance Company to contribute to a $1.5 million settlement of a personal injury lawsuit, finding... Read More
An Illinois federal district court found that withdrawal of all coverage defenses by a primary insurer does not vitiate a conflict of interest and the policyholder’s right to independent counsel where potential liability exceeds the primary insurer’s limits.
The district court, applying Illinois law, determined that Liberty Surplus Insurance Company breached its duty to defend Perma-Pipe Inc. by refusing... Read More
The Illinois Supreme Court rejected State Farm’s argument that a choice-of-law analysis required application of Indiana law, which Indiana federal district courts predicted would have relieved State Farm of its duty to defend its policyholder in a TCPA case.
In an action filed in Illinois state court, State Farm acknowledged that, under Illinois law, it would have a duty to... Read More
The Illinois Second District Appellate Court rejected plaintiff G.M Sign, Inc.’s attempt to recover $4.9 million from State Farm Fire & Casualty Company under an insurance policy containing a TCPA exclusion, finding that the exclusion also barred coverage for the alternative causes of action of conversion and consumer fraud.
The Telephone Consumer Protection Act exclusion at issue barred coverage for... Read More
The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals rejected a contractor’s argument that it only has collateral and indemnity obligations to its bonding agent if it is actually found liable for a breach of the surety bonds.
The court upheld summary judgment in favor of Hanover Insurance Co. for approximately $200,000 in damages and attorneys’ fees against a contractor who failed to... Read More
A New York appeals court affirmed the lower court’s ruling that RSUI Indemnity Co. does not have to provide indemnity coverage for Forest Laboratories’ $65 million class action settlement because lower level excess insurers did not exhaust their policies first. RSUI was a 7th layer excess carrier above a primary policy in an $80 million “tower” of insurance. Forest... Read More