News & Analysis as of

Duty to Defend Summary Judgment PFAS

Morris, Manning & Martin, LLP

Are PFAS Claims Excluded Under A Pollution Exclusion? A California Court Finds It Depends.

This article will discuss policyholder concerns after a California federal court recently found that some PFAS claims in an MDL were excluded under a pollution exclusion, but others were not. The case is Nat'l Foam, Inc. v....more

White and Williams LLP

Duty To Defend PFAS MDL Lawsuits: Texas Federal Court Weighs In

Few courts have yet decided insurance coverage issues in litigation involving per- and poly-fluoroalkyl substances (PFAS). But yesterday, in Crum & Forster Specialty Insurance Company v. Chemicals, Inc., No. H-20-3493, 2021...more

White and Williams LLP

North Carolina Federal Court Holds “Hazardous Materials” Exclusion Does Not Bar Duty to Defend Under CGL Policy for Bodily Injury...

White and Williams LLP on

On October 19, 2020, the U.S. District Court for the Western District of North Carolina held that a “hazardous materials” exclusion contained in a CGL policy did not preclude a duty to defend the insured against claims...more

3 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 1

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide