Extrinsic Evidence Not Allowed to Prove Exclusions to Duty to Defend The United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, applying Texas law, reversed and remanded the decision of the district court because, in contravention of the eight-corners rule, the district court improperly allowed extrinsic evidence into its review of whether State Farm Lloyds (“State Farm”) had a duty... Read More

Coverage “Arising Out of” Policyholder’s Operations Triggered Even if Not Named in Complaint The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals, applying Illinois law, affirmed the district court’s judgment on the pleadings holding that Columbia Insurance Group, Inc. (“Columbia”) owed a duty to defend a property owner and property manager as additional insureds in an underlying suit involving a construction injury.  In... Read More

Broad Discovery Permitted of Experts Retained by Insurer The Illinois Appellate Court for the Second District, in an opinion written by Justice Zenoff with Justices Jorgensen and Schostok concurring, applying Illinois law, upheld the trial court’s discovery order directing defendant Allison Rancour to produce documents relating to two controlled expert witnesses retained by her insurer, State Farm Insurance Company (“State... Read More

Replacement Vehicle Taxes and Fees Not Compulsory in a Total-Loss Claim The Seveth Circuit Court of Appeals, in an opinion written by Chief Justice Sykes, applying Illinois law, affirmed the District Court’s dismissal of a proposed class action suit against Geico Casualty Company (“Geico”) for breach of contract finding that neither the underlying policy nor the Illinois Insurance Code requires... Read More

Theoretical Amended Complaints and Tortured Grammar not Enough for Duty to Defend The Second Circuit Court of Appeals, applying New York Law, affirmed summary judgement granted by the district court finding that a fabric manufacturer’s insurer had no duty to defend or indemnify in a suit for copyright infringement. Spandex House, Inc. (“Spandex House”) was sued by Rex Fabrics for copyright... Read More

Insured’s Knowledge of Potential Harm Enough to Defeat Coverage The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals, in an opinion written by the Honorable Judge Scudder, applying Indiana law, affirmed the decision of the lower court finding that Westfield Insurance Company (“Westfield”) did not have an obligation to defend or indemnify its insured under a general commercial liability insurance policy because... Read More

“Gross Negligence” Can be an “Accident” Triggering Coverage The Iowa Supreme Court, applying Iowa law, reversed a trial court decision holding an insurer had no duty to defend or indemnify for allegations of gross negligence. The trial court opinion held that “gross negligence” fell outside of the scope of coverage of the applicable CGL policy because it could not... Read More

Negligence Claim Arising out of Shooting Barred by Assault and Battery / Firearm Exclusions The Illinois Appellate Court for the First District, in an opinion written by Justice Mikva with Justices Cunningham and Harris concurring, applying Illinois law, reversed the trial court and held that Markel International Insurance Co. (“Markel”) did not have a duty to defend Carolyn’s Lounge... Read More

On-Going Litigation Damages not a Separate Claim Within a Claim The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals, in an opinion written by the Honorable Judge Kanne, applying Illinois law, affirmed the decision of the trial court finding that Federal Insurance Company (“Chubb”) had no duty to defend or indemnify Peoples National Bank (“Peoples”) under a claims-made professional liability policy because the... Read More

Vertical Exhaustion Applies at Primary Level for Asbestos Claims The California Court of Appeals for the First District, applying California law, reversed the decision of the trial court and remanded for further proceedings after finding that the policyholder, SantaFe Braun, Inc. (“Braun”), only needed to prove exhaustion of the primary policy in order to access the excess coverage in... Read More