Newsletter RSS

Mealey's Insurance

  • November 25, 2025

    Insurer Says No Coverage Owed For Underlying Mold Contamination Suit

    LOS ANGELES — No coverage is owed to an insured for an underlying bodily injury suit stemming from exposure to mold in the insured’s home because coverage is excluded pursuant to the policy’s fungus exclusion, a homeowners insurer says in a complaint filed in California state court.

  • November 25, 2025

    Questions Of Fact Exist On Cause Of Corrosion Damage, Appellate Court Says

    CHARLESTON, W.Va. — The West Virginia Intermediate Court of Appeals reversed a lower court’s final judgment in a coverage dispute over damage caused by the release of liquefied chlorine from a railroad tank car after determining that questions of fact exist regarding the “efficient proximate cause” of corrosion damage to the tanker.

  • November 25, 2025

    HVAC System Replacement Proposal Properly Excluded From Jury, Panel Says

    PITTSBURGH — A trial court properly excluded a proposal for the replacement of an insured’s heating, ventilation and air conditioning (HVAC) system, allegedly contaminated with mold and asbestos, because the jury considered the same information about the HVAC system that the insured claims was incorrectly precluded by the court, a Pennsylvania Superior Court panel said in affirming the trial court’s decision.

  • November 25, 2025

    Fact Issues Exist On Cause Of Water Damage, California Panel Says In Reversing

    LOS ANGELES — The Second District California Court of Appeal reversed a trial court’s summary judgment ruling in favor of an insurer on breach of contract and bad faith claims in a dispute over coverage for water damage in the insured’s home after determining that questions of fact exist over whether a windstorm or wear and tear caused a hole in the home’s roof that resulted in water entering the home.

  • November 24, 2025

    Illinois High Court To Decide If Pollution Exclusion Applies To Regulated Emissions

    CHICAGO — The Illinois Supreme Court heard oral arguments on a certified question from the Seventh Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals regarding what effect, if any, a permit or regulation that authorizes emissions has in determining whether a pollution exclusion should be applied as a bar to coverage for bodily injury claims related to chemical discharges from the insured facility.

  • November 18, 2025

    Contamination Exclusion Bars Coverage For COVID-19 Losses, 9th Circuit Affirms

    SAN FRANCISCO — The Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on Nov. 17 affirmed a district court’s ruling that an all-risk policy’s contamination exclusion bars coverage for losses sustained during the COVID-19 pandemic, rejecting the insureds’ argument that the district court erred in finding that a California appellate panel’s ruling in a similar case is applicable to the instant dispute.

  • November 18, 2025

    No Coverage Owed To Insured For Contamination Suit, Federal Judge Says

    GREAT FALLS, Mont. — Two insurers have no duty to defend an insured against an underlying environmental contamination lawsuit because the contamination at issue occurred prior to the primary policy’s retroactive coverage date, a Montana federal judge said in denying the insured’s motion for summary judgment.

  • November 18, 2025

    Stipulation Filed To Dismiss 1 Insurer From Coronavirus Coverage Suit In Nevada

    LAS VEGAS — A stipulation was filed asking a Nevada court to dismiss with prejudice all claims against one insurer in an insured’s lawsuit seeking coverage under its all-risk insurance policies for its loss caused by COVID-19 and its causative virus at its insured properties.

  • November 18, 2025

    Delaware Bankruptcy Judge Denies Avon Insurers’ Bid To Stay Plan Pending Appeal

    WILMINGTON, Del. — Certain insurers of talc debtor AIO US Inc. did not show that they will be irreparably harmed if the confirmation order for the company’s Chapter 11 plan of liquidation is allowed to stand, so their motion to stay the ruling while they appeal the decision fails, a Delaware federal bankruptcy judge said.

  • November 18, 2025

    Broker Had Duty To Notify Insurer Of Lead Paint Exposure Claims, 2nd Circuit Says

    NEW YORK — A district court erred in dismissing a negligence claim against an insurance broker for failure to notify the insureds’ pollution liability insurer of an underlying bodily injury suit stemming from exposure to lead paint at the insureds’ property because the insureds adequately allege that the insurance broker had a duty to inform the insurer of the underlying suit, the Second Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals said.

  • November 17, 2025

    COMMENTARY: The Notice-Prejudice Rule In Hybrid Occurrence - Claims-Made Policies

    By Robert M. Hall

  • November 14, 2025

    8th Circuit: Court Did Not Abuse Its Discretion By Excluding Insured’s Expert

    ST. LOUIS — The Eighth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals determined that a lower federal court did not abuse its discretion when it excluded the opinion of an insured’s expert in the insured’s breach of contract lawsuit alleging that its commercial building was damaged by water intrusion during a storm, affirming the lower court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of the insurer.

  • November 11, 2025

    Insurer Seeks Reimbursement Of Punitive Damages Award Paid On Behalf Of Insured

    PHILADELPHIA — An insured is required to reimburse its insurer for the insurer’s payment of a punitive damages award entered against the insured in an underlying asbestos bodily injury suit because punitive damages are uninsurable pursuant to the terms of the policy and applicable law, the insurer says in a complaint filed in Pennsylvania federal court.

  • November 11, 2025

    6th Circuit Affirms Collateral Estoppel Ruling In Dispute Over Defense Costs

    CINCINNATI — The Sixth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals affirmed a lower court ruling that an insurer was collaterally estopped from relitigating whether defense costs were payable outside defined policy limits, holding that the issue was fully adjudicated in prior arbitration and that the absence of mutuality did not preclude application of collateral estoppel.

  • November 10, 2025

    Guaranty Association Seeks Net Worth Of Company Insured By Now-Insolvent Insurer

    NASHVILLE, Tenn. — The Tennessee Insurance Guaranty Association (TIGA) filed a declaratory judgment complaint in a Tennessee state court, seeking a judicial determination regarding the net worth of a company formerly insured by a now-insolvent insurer, arguing that TIGA is statutorily entitled to recover money paid on behalf of an insured whose obligations were satisfied by TIGA’s payments and whose net worth exceeded $25 million at the end of the year before the insurer’s insolvency.

  • November 07, 2025

    Insured Appeals $348,000 Award In Asbestos Indemnity Coverage Case

    NEW ORLEANS — An insurance company filed a notice indicating that it would appeal a decision finding it liable for the defense of an asbestos suit in a case in which a federal judge in Louisiana awarded $348,000 for breach of contract but finding that its arguments were not frivolous.

  • November 07, 2025

    Fact Issues Exist As To Insured’s Costs In Pollution Liability Dispute, Judge Says

    CLEVELAND — An Ohio federal judge denied a pollution legal liability insurer’s motion for summary judgment after determining that questions of fact exist regarding whether all of the costs to replace a parking lot were reasonable and necessary and resulted from a pollution condition.

  • November 06, 2025

    Insured Says 11th Circuit Panel Overlooked Evidence In Environmental Cleanup Suit

    ATLANTA — An 11th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel should grant rehearing in a contamination cleanup suit stemming from the release of petroleum and other contaminants from an underground storage tank at a gas station operated by the insured because the panel overlooked evidence showing that the insurer was not prejudiced by the insured’s late notice, the insured says in a Nov. 5 petition for panel rehearing.

  • November 06, 2025

    Earth Movement, Settling Exclusions Bar Coverage For Insured’s Property Damage

    NEW HAVEN, Conn. — No coverage is owed to an insured for the settling of its commercial building, discovered after thousands of gallons of water were released from a broken water line, because the policy’s earth movement exclusion and settling exclusion bar coverage for the damages, a Connecticut federal judge said in granting the insurer’s motion for summary judgment.

  • November 05, 2025

    No Coverage Owed For Well Contamination Class Action, Missouri Panel Says

    KANSAS CITY, Mo. — An insured is not entitled to coverage for the settlement of an underlying class action stemming from the insured’s failure to warn the underlying class plaintiffs about contamination discovered at the insured’s site because the underlying suit does not allege claims that occurred during the applicable policies’ periods, a Missouri appeals court said Nov. 4 in affirming a trial court’s ruling.

  • November 04, 2025

    Ongoing Damage Exclusions Not Enforceable In Water Damage Defects Suit, Judge Says

    NEWARK, N.J. — Exclusions for preexisting injury or damage and continuing or ongoing damage are unenforceable under New Jersey law and public policy in construction defect coverage cases involving continuous or progressive damage because progressive damage, such as damage caused by water infiltration stemming from construction defects, can progress undetected over time and warrants coverage across all policy years, a New Jersey state court judge said in granting the insureds’ motion for partial summary judgment on the applicability of the exclusions.

  • November 04, 2025

    Judge Awards Insured $348,000 In Asbestos Indemnity Coverage Case

    NEW ORLEANS — A federal judge in Louisiana, declining to reconsider his decision holding an insurer liable for defense costs in an asbestos case, said he would award $348,000 for breach of contract but rejected arguments that the insurer’s conduct constituted bad faith or misrepresentations about the policy.

  • October 29, 2025

    Pollution Exclusion Applies To 6 Remaining Sites At Issue In Coverage Dispute

    NEW YORK — A New York justice granted a motion for summary judgment filed by two insurers in an environmental contamination coverage suit after determining that the pollution exclusion in the various policies at issue bars coverage for environmental contamination at six remaining sites for which coverage was sought.

  • October 27, 2025

    Pollution Exclusion Bars Coverage For Rat Bite Fever Lawsuit, Insurer Says

    FORT LAUDERDALE, Fla. — No coverage is owed for an underlying lawsuit filed by a tenant of an insured who alleges that she and her child sustained bodily injuries as a result of a rat infestation in her rental unit because the policy’s organic pathogens exclusion and total pollution exclusion bar coverage for the underlying suit, an insurer says in an Oct. 24 complaint filed in Florida federal court.

  • October 23, 2025

    Underlying Toxic Exposure Suits Constitute 1 Occurrence, Federal Judge Says

    COVINGTON, Ky. — Noting that the exposure to allegedly toxic food flavoring products is similar to asbestos exposure, a Kentucky federal judge determined that the manufacture of the food flavoring products, which allegedly caused individuals to suffer from pulmonary issues, constitutes only one occurrence.