Amazon Not a Seller When Third-Party Sellers Involved The Ninth Circuit, applying Arizona law, affirmed the District Court’s ruling of summary judgment in favor of Amazon.com, Inc. and Amazon.com (jointly, “Amazon”) regarding State Farm Fire and Casualty Co.’s (“State Farm”) subrogation claims for strict liability and negligence.  The Ninth Circuit held Amazon is not a seller of products sold on... Read More

Report to Police 11 Days after Accident is “as Soon as Practicable” The Illinois Appellate Court for the First District, in an opinion written by Justice Lampkin with Justice Burke concurring and Justice Gordon concurring in part and dissenting in part, applying Illinois law, reversed the Circuit Court’s ruling and held that the relevant insurance policy only required an insured... Read More

Manufacturers Not Liable for Failure to Warn About the Dangers of Post-Sale Asbestos-Containing Materials  The Supreme Court of Tennessee, in an opinion written by Judge Page in which Chief Judge Bivins, Judge Clark, and Judge Kirby joined, applying Tennessee law, held in a products liability action stemming from occupational exposure to asbestos that the manufacturers of certain equipment (the “Equipment... Read More

Closure due to Governor’s Orders Not “Direct Physical Loss” The United State District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, in memorandum and order written by Judge Harry D. Leinenweber, applying Illinois law, granted The Cincinnati Insurance Company’s (“Cincinnati”) motion to dismiss plaintiff, T & E Chicago LLC’s (“T & E”), four-count putative class action complaint. The court found that... Read More

Broad Exclusion Applies Even to Claims Regarding Sale Through Intermediary The 1st District Appellate Court of Illinois, in an opinion by Justice Gordon, affirmed the trial court’s grant of summary judgement for The Hanover Insurance Company (“Hanover”) against its insureds, holding that Hanover did not have a duty to defend due to a broad “Products and Services Liability” exclusion in... Read More

Extrinsic Facts Outside of Complaint Not Permissible in Determining Duty to Defend The Illinois Appellate Court for the Second District, in an opinion written by Justice Hutchinson with Justices Birkett and Schostok concurring, applying Illinois law, affirmed the opinion of the trial court and held Pekin Insurance Company (“Pekin”) did not have a duty to defend McKeown Classic Homes,... Read More

No Conflict Unless Two Mutually Exclusive Theories of Liability The United State District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, in memorandum and order written by Judge Feinerman, applying Illinois law, granted Westfield National Insurance Company’s (“Westfield”) motion for summary judgment and declared that the insured, Builders Concrete Services, LLC (“Builders”), was not entitled to independent counsel in a... Read More

Government Shutdown for COVID-19 Not “Direct Physical Loss” The U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois Eastern Division, in an opinion by Judge Gettleman, applying Illinois law, dismissed a complaint brought by a dentist office against its insurer seeking a declaration that the insurer must provide coverage for losses due to the government-ordered closure because of the COVID-19... Read More

No Defense to “Big Brother” Volunteer for Allegations of Sexual Abuse The Wisconsin Court of Appeals for District 1, applying Wisconsin law, affirmed the decision of the circuit court and found no duty to defend or indemnify claims of alleged sexual abuse against an insured’s volunteer because the volunteer was not an insured under the applicable policy because his alleged... Read More