The Court of Appeals of New York, applying New York law, ruled that fraudulent entries by authorized users into an insured’s computer system did not constitute “fraudulent entry” under the unambiguous terms of a rider of a financial institution bond. Universal American Corp. (“Universal”) is a health insurance company that offers health insurance to Medicare-eligible individuals. Universal is, in turn,... Read More

A South Carolina federal district court, applying South Carolina law, ruled that an insurer affirmatively waived both the attorney-client and work product protections from disclosure because it raised a defense that its denial of coverage was reasonable. East Bridge Lofts Property Owners Association, Inc. (“East Bridge”) sued Creekstone SC I, LLC (“Creekstone”). Creekstone tendered the claim to Crum & Forster... Read More

Excess Insurers Cannot Challenge Exhaustion By Relitigating Suits Settled By Primary Insurers; Insurers’ Attempt To Limit Payment Of Defense Costs To Claims For Which They Made An Indemnity Payment Also Rejected The New Jersey Supreme Court declined to consider an appellate ruling in favor of policyholder IMO Industries, Inc., holding that the excess insurers could not challenge the exhaustion of... Read More

“Sudden and Accidental” And Statute of Limitations Are Jury Questions A  Massachusetts Court of Appeals, applying Massachusetts law, reversed summary judgment to various insurers against Narragansett Electric Co. (“NEC”) for environmental damage claims on the grounds that the timing of the insurers’ denial of the claims presented a fact question that should have been submitted to a jury. In a... Read More

4th Circ. Requires Lloyd’s to Defend Contractor as Additional Insured The Fourth Circuit, applying Maryland law, overturned the district court and found that Lloyd’s was required to defend a contractor as an additional insured under a subcontractor’s policy even though the underlying suit did not name the subcontractor. The court also allowed the contractor to rely on extrinsic evidence... Read More

The Washington Supreme Court, responding to a certified question from the Ninth Circuit, found that the term “collapse” in an insurance policy was ambiguous and under Washington law, means “substantial impairment of the structural integrity.” An engineer informed the Queen Anne Park Home Owner’s Association (“HOA”) that there was hidden decay in some shear walls (plywood/gypsum sheathings), which impaired the... Read More

Insurer’s Attempt To Avoid Continuous Trigger Based On “Credible Scientific Evidence” Rejected A Pennsylvania trial court, after granting an insurer’s motion to reconsider, reinstated its prior ruling rejecting an insurer’s attempt to avoid continuous trigger by presenting “credible scientific evidence” that the progression of asbestos-related diseases no longer begins with the initial exposure to asbestos. Mine Safety Appliance Company (“Mine Safety”)... Read More

Circumstantial Evidence Enough to Survive Motion to Dismiss The U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit, applying New Hampshire law, reversed the district court’s dismissal of a school’s suit against its insurer for coverage under a lost policy, finding that the allegations in the complaint created a plausible basis for believing the insurer issued the policy. Cardigan Mountain School (the... Read More

The Indiana Supreme Court denied petitions to transfer jurisdiction and certified as final the Court of Appeals’ ruling applying “pro rata” allocation to coverage for workers’ injury claims against the owner of a Taiwanese electronics plant. Workers filed a class action suit seeking damages for injuries sustained from exposure to solvents at an electronics plant in Taiwan partially owned by... Read More

A Florida Federal District Court, applying Florida law, found that a policyholder waived attorney-client privilege and work product protection over communications between its insurance broker and underlying defense counsel by putting them “at issue” in a coverage dispute with its insurer. In a coverage dispute between Sun Capital Partners, Inc. (“Sun”) and Twin City Fire Insurance Company (“Twin City”), Twin... Read More