In Citizens Ins. Co. of Am., et al. v. Augusta Chiller Service, Inc., et al., the Southern District of Georgia granted insurers' motions for summary judgment in part on their duty to defend under a primary and excess policy...more
New Jersey appeals court concludes that claims by a condominium resident alleging injury from indoor exposure to mold did not fall within a “consumption” exception to mold exclusions* in CGL policies where the resident...more
Ohio presents unique challenges to practitioners handling insurance claims in the state. Join Goldberg Segalla partners Michael A. Hamilton and Sean P. Hvisdas as they host a live, interactive webinar on some of the most...more
Chem. Solvents, Inc. v. Greenwich Ins. Co., 2023 U.S. App. LEXIS 868 (6th Cir. Jan. 13, 2023) - A divided Sixth Circuit panel holds that, under Ohio’s “all sums” allocation scheme, “targeted” insurers may seek indemnity...more
In policies without a specific bacteria or virus exclusion, the pollution exclusion may apply to exclude coverage for claims for bodily injury resulting from an occurrence involving bacteria or viral “contaminants.” The...more
In a sweeping decision, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit extended the absolute pollution exclusion to the unplanned discharge of “rock fines,” pellets produced during quarry operations, and denied coverage for...more
Ambiguity strikes again. While the heavily litigated pollution exclusion is well-known in the insurance world, its progeny—the indoor air exclusion—only recently has started making its way around the block. ...more
On July 10, 2018, Judge John H. McBryde of the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas, Fort Worth Division, held an insurer owed no coverage to a New Jersey rock quarry owner for the accidental...more
A federal judge recently relied on a pollution exclusion to find that Great American Insurance Company was not obligated to cover losses associated with the unintended distribution of rock fines into New Jersey’s Spruce Run...more
Slapping insurers with breach of contract and bad faith, Washington state’s highest court recently found that a general liability policy’s so-called “absolute” pollution exclusion may not be so absolute. In Xia et al. v....more
The latest round in the fight over the CGL’s “pollution exclusion” — which well-respected commentator Craig F. Stanovich has called “one of the least understood and most litigated portions” of the CGL — went to the insurance...more
A recent article in the Sports section of The Miami Herald read “Shooting coach helps Winslow.” Perhaps, but it probably didn’t help the coach much. The admonition to “eat every carrot and pea on your plate” undoubtedly...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: The Northern District of Indiana rejected the insurer’s assertion that its pollution exclusion clauses unambiguously included all contaminants. Indiana, unlike other jurisdictions, is pro-insured when...more