In Florida, an insurer is required to work diligently on the insured’s behalf to avoid an excess judgment, with the “same haste and precision as if it were in the insured’s shoes”. Harvey v. GEICO General Insurance Company,...more
An insurer’s duty to defend generally is based on a comparison of the complaint against the insured and the insurance policy language. However, in some jurisdictions, an insurer may consider "extrinsic" evidence — information...more
The 10th Circuit endorsed a clever way for an insurer to avoid a bad faith claim where there were potential misrepresentations in the policy application. In Evanston Insurance Company v. Aminokit Labs, Inc., the court...more
The construction contract calls for International Building Code-compliant lumber. The insured doesn’t supply that. What the insured does supply gets installed but then ripped out and replaced, causing damage to the...more
The proper trigger of coverage in construction defect disputes has been addressed on several occasions by New Jersey courts. Most notably, in Air Master & Cooling, Inc. v. Selective Insurance Company of America, 452 N.J....more
“[T]here is no separate cause of action of institutional bad faith,” the Pennsylvania Superior Court recently concluded, referencing Pennsylvania’s bad-faith statute, 42 Pa.C.S. § 8731, in an action by two homeowners against...more
Welcome to CICR’s annual review of insurance cases. Here, we spotlight five decisions from the last year that you should know about—and five pending cases to watch.
As our picks for “Cases to Know” indicate, 2019 was not a...more
1/29/2020
/ Asbestos Litigation ,
Auto Insurance ,
Bad Faith ,
CA Supreme Court ,
Choice-of-Law ,
CT Supreme Court ,
Denial of Insurance Coverage ,
FL Supreme Court ,
GA Supreme Court ,
Insurance Litigation ,
Liability Insurance ,
Malpractice Insurance ,
Negligence ,
Notice Prejudice Rule ,
NV Supreme Court ,
Occupational Exposure ,
OH Supreme Court ,
Policy Exclusions ,
Policy Terms ,
SD Supreme Court ,
Standing ,
Subrogation ,
WA Supreme Court
It has long been the rule, under Pennsylvania law, that an insurer's duty to defend is determined "solely" by the allegations in the "four corners" of the complaint against the insured. Kvaerner Metals Div. of Kvaerner U.S.,...more
On December 31, 2019, the First District Illinois Appellate Court issued its decision in Owners Insurance Company v. Precision Painting & Decorating Corporation, clarifying what does and does not constitute “property damage”...more
1/7/2020
/ Appeals ,
Breach of Contract ,
Commercial General Liability Policies ,
Construction Defects ,
Duty to Defend ,
Insurance Litigation ,
Lead Paint ,
Occurrence ,
Property Damage ,
Remand ,
Remediation ,
Reversal ,
Toxic Exposure
It has long been the rule in Pennsylvania that a mental or psychological injury generally does not constitute “bodily injury,” as defined in most standard insurance policies, unless that mental or psychological injury results...more
On August 29, 2019, in Pitzer College v. Indian Harbor Insurance Company, 2019 Cal. LEXIS 6240, the California Supreme Court held that, in the insurance context, the common law “notice-prejudice” rule is a “fundamental public...more
9/3/2019
/ CA Supreme Court ,
Choice-of-Law ,
Consent ,
Contamination ,
Insurance Litigation ,
Late Notices ,
Notice Prejudice Rule ,
Policy Terms ,
Public Policy ,
Remediation ,
Third-Party Liability
In Harleysville Preferred Insurance Company v. East Coast Painting & Maintenance, LLC, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 135295 (D.N.J. Aug. 12, 2019) (East Coast Painting), the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey held...more
In PJR Construction of N.J. v. Valley Forge Insurance Company, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 127973 (D.N.J. July 31, 2019) (PJR Construction), a New Jersey federal court held that the “j.(5)” “Ongoing Operations Exclusion” applied to...more
The standard for an “occurrence” under a commercial general liability (CGL) insurance policy has been addressed on several occasions by Pennsylvania courts when an insured has allegedly performed faulty workmanship on a...more
On May 28, 2019, the New Jersey Superior Court, Appellate Division examined the phrase “based on” in an assault-and-battery exclusion, finding that the phrase means “to make, form, or serve as the foundation of any claim,...more
In Keodalah v. Allstate Insurance Company, the Washington Supreme Court is set to determine whether individual insurance adjusters (as distinguished from the insurers for which they work) may be sued for bad faith and...more
12/12/2018
/ Bad Faith ,
Consumer Protection Laws ,
Errors and Omissions Policy ,
Fiduciary Duty ,
Insurance Adjusters ,
Insurance Industry ,
Insurance Litigation ,
Jurisdiction ,
Split of Authority ,
Uninsured and Under-Insured Motorists ,
WA Supreme Court
A recent opinion by the New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division (Second Department) highlights the potential risks for an insurer leaving an insured unrepresented while the insurer pursues other parties or insurers who may...more