Newsletter RSS

Mealey's Insurance

  • October 04, 2024

    Panel Vacates Portion Of Ruling Issued In Insurer’s Favor In Mold Coverage Suit

    ATLANTA — The 11th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals vacated a district court’s summary judgment ruling in favor of an insurer on breach of contract, declaratory judgment and bad faith claims after determining that the insured met its burden of proving that there is a potential of coverage for mold damage even if there was damage that existed before the issuance of the policy.

  • October 01, 2024

    Fact Issues Exist On Whether Coverage Is Owed For Water, Mold Damages, Judge Says

    LOS ANGELES — A California federal judge denied a motion for summary judgment filed by insurers that denied coverage for mold and water damages sustained in numerous buildings of an insured’s construction project because questions of fact exist as to whether the policies’ fungus extension and delay in opening extension afford coverage and whether the policies’ exclusion for cost of making good (COMG) excluded coverage for any damage caused by faulty workmanship.

  • October 01, 2024

    Insurer Seeks High Court’s Review Of 4th Circuit’s Ruling In Chemical Exposure Suit

    WASHINGTON D.C. — Review of a Fourth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals’ ruling that an insurer has a duty to defend an insured for an underlying chemical exposure suit is warranted because the Fourth Circuit incorrectly determined that a duty to defend exists even though the underlying complaint fails to assert any covered claims, an insurer says in a petition for a writ of certiorari filed in the U.S. Supreme Court.

  • October 01, 2024

    Federal Judge Dismisses Insured’s Fuel Oil Cleanup Suit Following Settlement

    LAS VEGAS — A Nevada federal judge granted a joint stipulation of dismissal after an excess insurer and its insured settled the insured’s claim for coverage for the cleanup of fuel oil that spilled on a Nevada highway from an insured tractor-trailer.

  • September 30, 2024

    Contractor Says Coverage Is Owed For Damages To Entirety Of Building

    CINCINNATI — A federal district court erred in refusing to find that coverage is owed for damages to the entirety of a building as a result of the collapse of some of the bricks from one of the building’s walls, the contractor says in an appellant reply brief filed in the Sixth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals.

  • September 30, 2024

    Reinsurer’s Declaratory Judgment Suit Is Tossed For Lack Of Contractual Privity

    BROOKLYN, N.Y. — Ruling in part that a reinsurer “failed to plead privity or third-party beneficiary status” and therefore failed to state any claims, a New York federal judge on Sept. 27 dismissed the lawsuit in which the reinsurer sought a declaratory judgment regarding state court litigation arising from a building’s partial collapse.

  • September 30, 2024

    Suit Seeking Coverage For Oil Spill Fails To Assert Claim Under Federal Law

    OKLAHOMA CITY — An insured’s breach of contract and declaratory judgment suit filed against its excess insurers seeking coverage for damages caused by an oil spill must be dismissed because the insured’s claims for breach of contract and declaratory judgment do not assert a claim under federal law, an Oklahoma federal judge said in granting a motion to dismiss filed by one of the excess insurers.

  • September 24, 2024

    Discovery Ruling Issued In Asbestos Coverage Row Involving Insolvent Insurer

    OMAHA, Neb. — A Nebraska federal magistrate judge granted in part National Indemnity Co. (NICO)’s motion to compel discovery of an insurer in its suit seeking to enforce obligations by multiple insurers, one of whom is now insolvent, for the liability NICO incurred related to claims for asbestos exposure, finding that the attorneys’ eyes only designation (AEO) must be removed from discovery material due, in part, to the insurer’s failure to “articulate why an AEO designation is the right tool to prevent this harm.”

  • September 23, 2024

    Federal Magistrate Judge Says Asbestos Coverage Suit Should Proceed

    CINCINNATI — An Ohio federal magistrate judge recommended denying an insurer’s motion to dismiss an insured’s amended complaint seeking coverage for underlying asbestos liabilities because the amended complaint sufficiently establishes the existence of personal jurisdiction over the insurer and sufficiently alleges facts to support the insured’s declaratory judgment and breach of contract claims.

  • September 23, 2024

    Pollution Exclusion Does Not Preclude Coverage For Suit Stemming From Breath Mints

    ST. LOUIS — A Missouri federal judge on Sept. 20 granted a motion to dismiss an insurer’s suit seeking a declaration that no coverage is owed for an underlying suit seeking damages caused by a child’s ingestion of liquid breath mints that contained a chemical that damaged the child’s esophagus because the policy’s pollution exclusion cannot be interpreted as a bar to coverage for the underlying suit.

  • September 23, 2024

    California High Court Tosses Certified Question Following COVID-19 Coverage Ruling

    SAN FRANCISCO — In light of the recent ruling in John's Grill, Inc. v. The Hartford Financial Services Group, Inc., the California Supreme Court dismissed its consideration of a certified question from the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals asking whether an insurance policy’s virus exclusion is unenforceable in a coverage lawsuit brought by owners, operators and managers of two Napa Valley, Calif., restaurants in the wake of the coronavirus pandemic.

  • September 19, 2024

    Interpretation Of ‘Direct Physical Loss’ Phrase Was Erroneous, Building Owner Says

    CINCINNATI — A district court erred in relying on a definition of the term “direct physical loss” as used in a prior opinion issued by the Sixth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals when it determined that the collapse of some bricks from a wall within a building did not cause any damage to the wall or building as a whole, the building owner maintains in a Sept. 18 appellant reply brief filed in the Sixth Circuit.

  • September 19, 2024

    Judge Denies Summary Judgment On Issue Of Contamination Exclusion’s Applicability

    SANTA ANA, Calif. — A California federal judge refused to grant summary judgment in favor of an insured on the applicability of a policy’s contamination exclusion to losses sustained by the insured in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic because the evidence could support a jury finding that the insured believed that the contamination exclusion would apply as a bar to coverage for the losses caused by the coronavirus.

  • September 18, 2024

    No Coverage Afforded For Asbestos Suits Under Exposure Trigger Theory, Insurers Say

    FORT WORTH, Texas — Two insurers maintain in reply briefs filed in Texas federal court that summary judgment in their favor in an asbestos coverage suit is warranted because coverage under their policies is barred under an exposure trigger of coverage theory, which they say applies pursuant to a Fifth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals’ decision on the trigger of coverage issue.

  • September 17, 2024

    Judge Refuses To Dismiss Contractor’s Coverage Suit Arising From Hotel Collapse

    NEW ORLEANS — A federal judge in Louisiana denied builders risk insurers’ motion to dismiss a contractor’s breach of contract lawsuit seeking additional insured coverage for its $89,877,694 in losses arising from the aftermath of the partial collapse of a Hard Rock Hotel project in New Orleans, rejecting the insurers’ contention that the contractor’s lawsuit is untimely.

  • September 17, 2024

    No Coverage Owed For Subpoena Issued To Insured In Fire-Suppressing Foam MDL

    NEW HAVEN, Conn. — No coverage is owed to an insured distributor of a fire-suppressing foam for a subpoena served on the insured in an underlying multidistrict litigation seeking damages for bodily injuries and contaminated drinking water caused by the use of the foam because the subpoena does not constitute a claim under the insurance policy at issue, a Connecticut federal judge said in denying the insured’s motion for summary judgment and in granting the insurer’s motion for summary judgment.

  • September 17, 2024

    Parties Dismiss Appeal Following Settlement Of Environmental Coverage Suit

    SOUTH BEND, Ind. — An insured and its insurers filed a stipulation of voluntary dismissal of all appeals and cross-appeals in the Seventh Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on Sept. 16 following the settlement of the insured’s suit seeking coverage for the cleanup of polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs).

  • September 17, 2024

    Insured Says District Court Erred In Interpreting Radioactive Materials Exclusion

    CHICAGO — A district court erred in finding that no coverage is owed by insurers pursuant to the policies’ radioactive materials exclusion for an underlying suit seeking damages for bodily injuries caused by exposure to electromagnetic (EMF) radiation from the insured’s electric transformers because a reasonable insured would interpret the exclusion as providing coverage for the EMF exposure claims, the insured maintains in an appellant brief filed in the Seventh Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals.

  • September 17, 2024

    Review Of Ruling In Benzene Suit Not Warranted, Insured Says In Response Brief

    AUSTIN, Texas — Review of a Texas appellate court’s finding that a policy’s arbitration provision applies only to disputes arising under the insurance policy and not to disputes arising under a settlement pertaining to benzene-related claims filed against the insured is not warranted because the appellate court properly found that the settlement agreement’s forum-selection clause requires disputes over the settlement agreement to be resolved in court, the insured says in response to the insurer’s petition for review filed in the Texas Supreme Court.

  • September 13, 2024

    Settlement Reached Between Insurer, Insureds In Water Damage Coverage Suit

    CHEYENNE, Wyo. — A homeowners insurer and its insureds notified the U.S. District Court for the District of Wyoming that a settlement of the insureds’ breach of contract and bad faith suit stemming from a clam for water damages has been reached.

  • September 10, 2024

    Question Of Fact Exists On Whether Additional Coverage For Water Damage Is Owed

    NEWARK, N.J. — A New Jersey federal judge on Sept. 9 granted a homeowners insurer’s motion for summary judgment on an insured’s bad faith claim because a question of fact exists as to whether the insured is entitled to additional coverage under the policy for water damage in his home.

  • September 10, 2024

    Insured Settles With Insurer In Environmental Coverage Suit; Claims Dismissed

    DETROIT — A Michigan federal judge dismissed an insured’s claims against an insurer named in the insured’s environmental contamination coverage suit after a settlement was reached between the parties.

  • September 10, 2024

    Judge Conditionally Dismisses Insureds’ Remediation Suit Following Settlement

    SAN FRANCISCO — A California federal judge entered an order of conditional dismissal in a coverage dispute over costs for remediating a riverbank after the insureds notified the judge that they had reached a settlement with their umbrella liability insurer.

  • September 10, 2024

    Insurer Says Potential For Coverage Of Asbestos Suits Exists Under Other Policies

    FORT WORTH, Texas — In response to motions for summary judgment in Texas federal court, an insurer claims that policies issued by two other insurers should be found to afford coverage for underlying asbestos bodily injury suits filed against a mutual insured because some of the underlying claims potentially allege exposure during the insurers’ policy periods.

  • September 09, 2024

    After Reconsideration, Judge Says Court Erred When It Ruled In Insurer’s Favor

    LOS ANGELES — Granting insureds’ motion for reconsideration, a federal judge in California said the court erred when it granted an insurer’s motion for summary judgment as to insureds’ breach of contract claim, finding that the court cannot conclude as a matter of law that the insureds’ water damage loss is not covered by their policy.