Carbon monoxide poisoning coverage not barred by “indoor air” exclusion
The Tenth Circuit, applying Oklahoma law, held that a policy exclusion for injuries due to “qualities or characteristics of indoor air” was ambiguous because it was susceptible to multiple reasonable interpretations. The Tenth Circuit held that the exclusion should be interpreted in favor of coverage, and therefore, the “indoor air”... Read More
Faulty subcontractor work not an “occurrence” triggering insurer’s duty to defend
The Supreme Court of Ohio, applying Ohio law, reversed the judgment of the court of appeals and reinstated the judgment of the trial court. The Supreme Court of Ohio found no duty to defend in a suit brought by a property owner due to faulty work done by a... Read More
Bitcoin constitutes “property” under homeowner’s policy
An Ohio trial court, on an issue of first impression under Ohio law, held that Bitcoin is recognized as property under a homeowner’s policy and not money. Therefore, a homeowner’s claim for stolen Bitcoin was not subject to the sublimit under the policy for money.
James Kimmelman submitted a claim to his homeowner insurer, Wayne... Read More
Insured’s unreasonable untimely notice of environmental claims prejudicial to insurer
An appellate court in Indiana, applying Indiana law, affirmed the grant of summary judgment to an insurer after the insured waited more than a decade to notify the insurer that it had made payments in several suits brought against it.
Franke Plating Works (“Franke Plating”) is an Indiana company that has... Read More
CA Fed. Ct. affirms BK Ct.’s award of IL §155 of fees, expenses, interest, statutory penalty and policy limits
The Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of California awarded the Trustee of the CFB/WFB Liquidation Trust extra-contractual damages against Continental Casual Company (“Continental”) under Illinois Insurance Code 215 ILCS 5/155 for vexatious and unreasonable conduct due to its failure to... Read More
“Discovery rule” doesn’t toll Statute of Limitation in negligent procurement case against agent (2 Dissenters)
The Illinois Supreme Court, applying Illinois law, held that a two-year statute of limitations applies to an insureds’ claim that their insurance agent negligently sold them a deficient insurance policy. Moreover, the Illinois Supreme Court held that the cause of action for negligent procurement against... Read More
The District Court of Massachusetts, applying Massachusetts law, accepted and adopted the recommendation of a Magistrate Judge that ACE Property and Casualty Insurance Co. (“ACE”) breached its duty to defend its insured, State Line Laundry Services (“State Line Laundry”), in a dispute with Plaistow Project, LLC (“Plaistow”). The court also accepted and adopted the Magistrate’s denial of ACE’s motion... Read More
A New York trial court, applying New York law, ruled that an excess insurer failed to meet its burden on summary judgment to prove that a “prior and pending” litigation or investigation exclusion applied to bar coverage.
The insurance coverage case stemmed from an SEC proceeding and criminal prosecutions alleging Platinum Management (NY) LLC’s (“Platinum”) and other defendants were involved... Read More
In a 4-3 decision, the Supreme Court of Florida, applying Florida law, reversed the Fourth District Court of Appeals and restored a bad faith finding against the insurer because the Fourth District misapplied Florida precedent and failed to properly apply the directed verdict standard. The Florida Supreme Court found that the Fourth District’s bad faith analysis lacked the important... Read More
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