Hoke Attorneys at Law – LLCHoke Attorneys at Law – LLC
  • (312) 575-8559

  • contact@hokellc.com

  • Practices
    • Commercial Litigation
    • Insurance Recovery & Risk Transfer
    • Governmental Relations
  • Fees
  • Professionals
    • Stephen Hoke
    • Amalia Rioja
    • Laura Geiger
    • Gina Pacula
    • Claudia Temple, MBA
  • Clients
  • Endorsements
  • Accomplishments
    • Recent Accomplishments
    • Publications
    • Endorsements
  • Insurance Bytes
  • Contact

Pollution Exclusion 7th Cir.

January 29, 2015 | shoke2013 | Insurance Bytes

Interprets Completed Operations Clause Narrowly And Finds Exclusion Applicable Under Michigan Rather Than Indiana Law After Choice Of Law Analysis The Seventh Circuit, applying Michigan law, found no exception to a pollution exclusion and refused to hold insurer liable for millions in clean up and litigation costs for pollution from an Indiana manufacturing plant. The insured, Visteon Corp. (“Visteon”), a... Read More

Construction Defect

January 29, 2015 | shoke2013 | Insurance Bytes

California Appellate Court Reinstates Case Finding 1) Settlement With Other Insurers Doesn’t Preclude Recovery, And 2) Denial Of Insurer’s Summary Judgment Motion Doesn’t Necessarily Establish Defense Duty A California appeals court, applying California law, reversed and remanded a lower court ruling which had entered judgment in favor of the insurer in a coverage suit between McMillin Companies, LLC (“McMillin”), a... Read More

Late Notice

January 29, 2015 | shoke2013 | Insurance Bytes

Insurer Not Liable Under Texas Law After Judge Requires Strict Compliance With Notice Requirement A Texas magistrate judge, applying Texas law, found Hallmark Collection of Homes, LLC (“Hallmark Collection”), a bankrupt homebuilder, did not provide its insurer, Mid-Continent Casualty Co. (“Mid-Continent), adequate notice of a lawsuit and, therefore, Mid-Continent did not have to pay its share of a $63... Read More

Illinois Federal Court D&O Policy Interpretation

January 9, 2015 | shoke2013 | Insurance Bytes

“Insured Versus Insured” Exclusion Does Not Require Collusiveness An Illinois federal court, applying Illinois law, held that based on the clear and unambiguous language of the applicable insurance policy, an “Insured Versus Insured” exclusion in a directors and officers’ liability policy barred coverage in a lawsuit filed by the named insured against another insured. Moreover, the court found that Illinois... Read More

11th Cir. D&O Interpretation

January 9, 2015 | shoke2013 | Insurance Bytes

“Insured v. Insured” Exclusion Ambiguous The Eleventh Circuit, applying Georgia law, overturned a lower court’s decision and ruled that an “Insured Versus Insured” exclusion was ambiguous with regard to a lawsuit brought by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”) against former bank officers because other courts had interpreted similar language in varying ways. The court also held that extrinsic... Read More

Choice of Counsel

January 9, 2015 | shoke2013 | Insurance Bytes

Policyholder’s Request To Select Counsel Not A Breach of Duty To Cooperate Two California federal courts, applying California law, dismissed virtually identical claims brought by certain insurers against Centex Homes and Centex Real Estate Corp. (“Centex”).  The Central District Court held that the insurers failed to show Centex had breached its duty to cooperate based on asserting its choice... Read More

Asbestos / Number of Occurrences

January 9, 2015 | shoke2013 | Insurance Bytes

“No Drop Down” Endorsement Does Not Bar Insured From Aggregating Asbestos Claims A Pennsylvania federal court, applying Ohio law, found as a matter of law that certain umbrella insurance policies were merely clarified by subsequent “No Drop Down” endorsements and that the language of the umbrella policies did not prevent the insured from aggregating multiple asbestos bodily injury claims into... Read More

Property Insurance

December 19, 2014 | shoke2013 | Insurance Bytes

NJ Federal Court Finds Ammonia Release A Direct Physical Loss A New Jersey federal court, applying New Jersey law, found that the discharge of ammonia at a manufacturing facility constituted “direct physical loss of or damage to” property.  The court reasoned that although there was no actual physical change or alteration to the property, the presence of ammonia caused the... Read More

Noncumulation Clause

December 19, 2014 | shoke2013 | Insurance Bytes

NY Appellate Court Finds Single Limit For Multiple Parties’ Exposure To Lead Paint. The New York Appellate Court, applying New York law, held that an insurer’s maximum total liability for successive exposure to lead paint in the same apartment was only one policy limit due to a noncumulation clause. Coverage was sought by the insured for bodily injuries sustained by... Read More

Trigger Of Coverage / 7th Cir.

December 19, 2014 | shoke2013 | Insurance Bytes

First-Party Property Policy Covers 16 Years of Home Water Damage. The Seventh Circuit, applying Wisconsin law, ruled that Chubb Indemnity Insurance Co. (“Chubb”) was liable to its insureds who were seeking recovery for continuous water damage that their home sustained for over 16 years.  Based upon the policy language, the court held that coverage was triggered under Wisconsin’s continuous trigger... Read More

← Previous1…444546…53Next →

View Disclaimer

Join Our Mailing List

Join our mailing list to get our "Insurance Bytes" monthly newsletter delivered straight to your inbox!

Get in Touch

Address:
400 S. Green St.,
Suite 556
Chicago, IL 60607

Phone: (312) 575 - 8559
Email: contact@hokellc.com
FacebookLinkedin
© 2022. Hoke LLC. All Rights Reserved.
  • Practices
    • Commercial Litigation
    • Insurance Recovery & Risk Transfer
    • Governmental Relations
  • Fees
  • Professionals
    • Stephen Hoke
    • Amalia Rioja
    • Laura Geiger
    • Gina Pacula
    • Claudia Temple, MBA
  • Clients
  • Endorsements
  • Accomplishments
    • Recent Accomplishments
    • Publications
    • Endorsements
  • Insurance Bytes
  • Contact