Newsletter RSS

Mealey's Insurance

  • May 09, 2025

    No Added Weight Should Be Given To Policy Limits In Allocating Costs, Judge Says

    PORTLAND, Ore. — A time-on-the-risk allocation of defense costs in an environmental contamination suit is the appropriate method of allocation, an Oregon federal judge said in applying applicable Oregon law and in rejecting the insurer’s argument that equal or more weight should be given to the insurer’s policies’ limits rather than the insurer’s time on the risk when allocating defense costs.

  • May 09, 2025

    Ship Subcontractor Seeks Approvals For Bankruptcy Plan, Disclosure Statement

    RICHMOND, Va. — Defunct ship subcontractor and Chapter 11 debtor Hopeman Brothers Inc. and an asbestos claimants’ committee filed a joint motion asking a Virginia federal bankruptcy judge to schedule a combined hearing to approve the disclosure statement for its proposed plan of reorganization and consider confirmation of the plan, which would establish a trust with insurance proceeds and cash “to allow for resolution of the thousands of asbestos claims against Hopeman.”

  • May 07, 2025

    N.J. Panel Says Trial Court Properly Used Time-On-The-Risk Allocation Method

    TRENTON, N.J. — A panel of the New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division, in applying Massachusetts law, affirmed a trial court’s use of a time-on-the-risk allocation method to determine the amount owed by an umbrella insurer to an insured for environmental contamination remediation costs after determining that the trial court correctly applied the proper Massachusetts precedent that sets forth allocation requirements under Massachusetts law.

  • May 07, 2025

    Coverage Barred For Insured’s Disposal Of Asbestos-Containing Debris, Insurer Says

    ROCK ISLAND, Ill. — No coverage is owed for an underlying suit stemming from the insureds’ alleged improper disposal of construction debris because the policy’s asbestos and pollution exclusions clearly bar coverage, an insurer maintains in a reply in support of its motion for summary judgment and opposition to the underlying plaintiff’s cross-motion for summary judgment.

  • May 06, 2025

    9th Circuit Denies Insurer’s Petition For Rehearing In Contamination Coverage Suit

    SAN FRANCISCO — The Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on May 5 denied an insurer’s petition for panel rehearing in an environmental contamination coverage suit, refusing to reconsider its decision that a jury trial is necessary to determine the reasonableness of the defense costs incurred by the insured from the date of the insured’s tender of the underlying complaint through the date of the trial court’s order.

  • April 30, 2025

    On Remand From Supreme Court, 4th Circuit Approves Kaiser Debtors’ Reorganization

    RICHMOND, Va. — The plan of reorganization of Chapter 11 debtors Kaiser Gypsum Co. Inc. and Hanson Permanente Cement Inc. was proposed in good faith and satisfies the asbestos bankruptcy requirements of Section 524(g) of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code, a Fourth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel held April 29 in affirming the plan’s confirmation on remand from the U.S. Supreme Court.

  • April 30, 2025

    Legionnaires’ Suit Not Subject To Arbitration, Reinsured Entity Says

    DETROIT — A reinsured entity is opposing a motion to dismiss in a Michigan federal court filed by the defendants in a lawsuit over claims related to Legionnaires’ disease, arguing that the defendants improperly invoked an arbitration provision and failed to seek concurrence before filing and that the underlying issues fall outside the arbitration provision because they stem from an unprocured and undisclosed agreement.

  • April 30, 2025

    Fact Issues Remain On Insured’s Extracontractual Claims In Water Damage Dispute

    SEATTLE — An insurer is not entitled to summary judgment on an insured condominium association’s extracontractual claims because questions of fact exist regarding the reasonableness of the insurer’s interpretation of the policy language, the adequacy of the insurer’s claim investigation and the manner in which the insurer maintained the claim file, a Washington federal judge said in denying the insurer’s motion for summary judgment in a water damage coverage dispute.

  • April 28, 2025

    Panel Says No Additional Coverage Owed For Underlying Carbon Monoxide Suit

    SAN FRANCISCO — An insured landlord is not entitled to additional coverage for the settlement of a tenant’s underlying bodily injury suit arising out of carbon monoxide poisoning because the apartment insurance policy’s liability limit applies only to the year in which the occurrence took place, the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals said April 25 in affirming a district court’s finding that the stacking of annual policy limits is prohibited by the policy.

  • April 24, 2025

    Pollution Exclusions Bar Coverage For Contamination Suit, Panel Says In Reversing

    DENVER — Insurers have no duty to defend or provide coverage to an insured for an underlying environmental contamination suit because the insurers’ pollution exclusions clearly bar coverage for the underlying suit, the 10th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals said April 23 in reversing a district court’s ruling.

  • April 23, 2025

    Contractors’ Insurers Appeal Ruling That Subcontractors’ Acts Caused Water Leak

    NEW ORLEANS — A general contractor’s insurers on April 22 filed notice that they are appealing a Louisiana federal judge’s ruling granting summary judgment to two subcontractors who were responsible for installing a heating, ventilation and air conditioning (HVAC) system and the subcontractors’ insurers after finding that the plaintiff insurers failed to show that the subcontractors’ acts or omissions caused or contributed to a water leak in the HVAC system.

  • April 23, 2025

    Underlying Plaintiff Says Asbestos, Pollution Exclusions Do Not Preclude Coverage

    ROCK ISLAND, Ill. — An insurer owes a duty to defend and indemnify its insureds in an underlying suit stemming from the insureds’ alleged improper disposal of construction debris because the policy’s asbestos and pollution exclusions do not bar coverage as the underlying suit alleges other potentially covered claims, the underlying plaintiff maintains in a cross-motion for summary judgment and in a response to the insurer’s motion for summary judgment.

  • April 23, 2025

    Illinois High Court Will Answer Panel’s Certified Question On Pollution Exclusion

    CHICAGO — The Illinois Supreme Court issued an order noting that it will answer a question certified by Seventh Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals that seeks the high court’s input on what effect, if any, a permit or regulation that authorizes emissions has in determining how a pollution exclusion should be applied in a standard commercial general liability policy.

  • April 23, 2025

    Jury Trial Should Not Be Limited To Defense Costs, Insurer Tells 9th Circuit

    SAN FRANCISCO — An insurer filed a petition for panel rehearing in the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals, contending that the panel should modify its recent opinion and remand for a jury trial on all of the damages claimed by an insured in an environmental contamination coverage suit rather than remand only for a jury trial to determine the reasonableness of the defense costs incurred by the insured from the date of the insured’s tender of the underlying complaint through the date of the district court’s order.

  • April 22, 2025

    Oregon High Court Reverses Lower Courts’ Holding On Coverage For ‘Occurrence’

    SALEM, Ore. — The Oregon Supreme Court reversed a holding by lower courts that a commercial general liability insurer owed no duty to indemnify homeowners who sustained water damage in their home due to a cracked and sloped garage floor laid by the insured’s subcontractor, finding that whether an insurance claim seeks recovery for an ‘accident’ “depends on whether there is a basis in fact for imposing tort liability” and there were “factual disputes material to whether such a basis exists.”

  • April 22, 2025

    Insurers Owe Coverage For Environmental Contamination, Remediation Costs, IBM Says

    SYRACUSE, N.Y. — Insurers of International Business Machines Corp. owe coverage for more than $900 million in costs incurred by IBM to remediate environmental contamination discovered at or near IBM’s manufacturing facilities because the policies under which IBM seeks coverage do not include a pollution exclusion and provide coverage for property damage caused by an occurrence, IBM says in a complaint filed in New York federal court.

  • April 17, 2025

    9th Circuit Dismisses Claims Against Insurer In Mold Damage Coverage Dispute

    SAN FRANCISCO — A panel of the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on April 16 affirmed a lower court’s ruling in a mold and moisture damage coverage dispute finding that a contractor violated the terms of an insurance policy by incurring more than $1 million in repair costs without first seeking consent from an insurer.

  • April 16, 2025

    Insurers Have No Duty To Defend Based On Silica Exclusions, Judge Says

    LOS ANGELES — Insurers of an importer and distributor of quartz stone products have no duty to defend their insured in underlying bodily injury suits stemming from exposure to silica dust from the insured’s quartz products because the policies’ silica exclusion clearly bars coverage for the underlying suits.

  • April 16, 2025

    7th Circuit Certifies Question On Pollution Exclusion To Illinois Supreme Court

    CHICAGO — The Seventh Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals certified a question to the Illinois Supreme Court seeking guidance on what effect, if any, a permit or regulation that authorizes emissions has in determining how a pollution exclusion should be applied in a standard commercial general liability policy.

  • April 15, 2025

    Settled Asbestos Defendant Blames Dilatory Resolution On Insurer’s Conduct Alone

    NEW ORLEANS — An insurer misinterpreted and misrepresented the provisions of its own policy and the insurer’s actions delayed payment after a settlement in an asbestos case and it should not be rewarded for such bad faith conduct, an insured told a federal judge in Louisiana on April 14 in seeking to add a crossclaim for penalties and attorney fees.

  • April 15, 2025

    Texas Federal Judge Dismisses Chemical Exposure Coverage Suit Per Insurers’ Request

    HOUSTON — A Texas federal judge dismissed a suit filed by insurers seeking a declaration that no coverage is owed to an insured for underlying suits arising out of an explosion caused by a chemical release at a chemical plant following the insurers’ filing of a notice of voluntary dismissal.

  • April 15, 2025

    Insurers Waived Subrogation Rights, Are Not Entitled To Reimbursement, Judge Says

    NEW HAVEN, Conn. — Insurers seeking reimbursement from a waste facility operator for more than $8 million that the insurers paid to their insured for damages at the facility are barred from seeking reimbursement from the waste facility operator pursuant to a subrogation waiver included in the insured’s contract with the facility operator, a Connecticut federal judge said in granting the waste facility operator’s motion for summary judgment.

  • April 14, 2025

    2nd Circuit Refuses To Answer Certified Questions In Asbestos Liability Suit

    NEW YORK — The Second Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on April 11 refused to answer three certified questions pertaining to the issues of whether a named insured whose subsidiary companies are named as defendants in underlying asbestos liability lawsuits is entitled to coverage under its policies and whether an all-sums or pro rata method of allocation applies to defense and indemnity costs incurred by the insured after determining that answering the certified questions will not help in advancing the suit to final termination.

  • April 14, 2025

    Trial Court’s Judgment For Insurer In Water, Mold Suit Must Be Reversed, Panel Says

    TAMPA, Fla. — A trial court erred in entering judgment in favor of an all-risk insurer on a breach of contract claim in a water and mold damage coverage suit because the insureds had a burden only to show that a loss occurred during the policy period and did not bear the burden of showing that the insurer did not honor its obligations under the policy, the Second District Florida Court of Appeal said.

  • April 14, 2025

    Connecticut State Judge Refuses To Strike Insured’s Bad Faith Claim

    BRIDGEPORT, Conn. — An insured’s bad faith claim against a property insurer can proceed because it is not clear from the facts alleged in the complaint if the insurer’s denial of coverage for a water damage claim was reasonable, a Connecticut state judge held in denying the insurer’s motion to strike the bad faith claim.