Law360, New York ( May 28, 2015, 10:44 AM EDT) -- In the wake of the Indiana Supreme Court decision in Allstate Ins. Co. v. Dana Corp., 759 N.E.2d 1049 (Ind. 2001) or "Dana II" as it is often called, most knowledgeable insurance coverage lawyers, claims professionals and risk managers would describe Indiana as an "all sums" jurisdiction. Indeed, the Indiana Supreme Court did adopt the minority "all sums" approach to allocation in Dana II. Yet, the Indiana Supreme Court reminded us last week that, even in jurisdictions with law applying an "all sums" allocation, there are substantial limitations on the "all sums" approach and a pro rata allocation nonetheless may be applied. More generally, last week's decision of the Indiana Supreme Court serves as an important reminder that general descriptions of governing legal principals must yield to particular policy language....