Try our Advanced Search for more refined results
- Law360
- Law360 UK
- Law360 Pulse
- Law360 Employment Authority
- Law360 Tax Authority
- Law360 Insurance Authority
- Law360 Real Estate Authority
- Law360 Healthcare Authority
- Law360 Bankruptcy Authority
- Products
- Lexis®
- Law360 In-Depth
- Law360 Podcasts
- Rankings
- Regional Powerhouses
- Law360's MVPs
- Women in Law Report
- Law360 400
- Diversity Snapshot
- Practice Groups of the Year
- Rising Stars
- Titans of the Plaintiffs Bar
- Sections
- Adv. Search & Platform Tools
- About all sections
- Browse all sections
- Banking
- Bankruptcy
- Class Action
- Competition
- Employment
- Energy
- Expert Analysis
- Insurance
- Intellectual Property
- Product Liability
- Securities
- Beta Tools
- Track docs
- Track attorneys
- Track judges
ACE American Insurance Company et al v. Murco Wall Products, Inc. et al
Case Number:
4:22-cv-01137
Court:
Nature of Suit:
Judge:
Firms
- Blaies & Hightower
- Cantey Hanger
- Duane Morris
- Germer PLLC
- Haynes & Boone
- Hicks Thomas
- Kelly Hart
- Kennedys Law LLP
- Martin Disiere
- Tollefson Bradley
Companies
Sectors & Industries:
-
June 26, 2024
Travelers Nabs Partial Win In Asbestos Coverage Dispute
A Travelers unit only has a duty to indemnify but not defend a drywall and paint company that faces several underlying asbestos injury lawsuits, a Texas federal court ruled, rejecting the company's reading of "not covered" in its umbrella policy providing excess coverage.
-
January 30, 2024
Paint Co., Insurer Denied Wins In Asbestos Coverage Spat
A drywall and paint company and its excess insurer can't toss each other's cross-claims in a lawsuit by the company's primary insurers, a Texas federal judge ruled, finding Tuesday that both parties sufficiently pled their arguments in the dispute over whether the company exploited its primary insurers in underlying asbestos litigation.
-
May 30, 2023
Insurers Seek Relief From Defense Of Asbestos Suits
A drywall and paint company is exploiting its primary insurers by allowing them to pay to defend numerous lawsuits against it in connection with asbestos injuries while using an excess insurer to pay settlements to never exhaust its primary limits, the primary insurers told a Texas federal court.