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

“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

“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

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

“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

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

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

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

10th Cir. Rejects Insurer’s Attempt to Avoid Coverage For Window Defect Claims Based On Faulty Workmanship. The Tenth Circuit, applying Utah law, agreed with the lower court that Cincinnati Insurance Co. (“Cincinnati”) has a duty to defend AMSCO Windows (“AMSCO”) in litigation concerning its manufactured windows, but not for pre-litigation proceedings brought by homeowners under a Nevada statute because they... Read More