Paraco Gas Corporation purchased an insurance policy for Directors, Officers and Private Company Liability (“D&O”) from Ironshore Indemnity, Inc. that covered certain acts of Paraco’s officers and directors. Paraco...more
It’s not often that the U.S. Supreme Court weighs in on insurance issues. That’s because the McCarran-Ferguson Act gives states the primary authority to regulate the business of insurance. So when the Supreme Court speaks on...more
Insurers often include exclusions within their liability policies to prohibit coverage for claims arising out of pollution exposure. The exact wording of the exclusion can differ significantly, but the key issue is whether...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
In Dyno Nobel v. Steadfast Insurance Co., the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals recently held that, under Utah law, where a specific state is listed in an endorsement heading, coverage under the endorsement is limited to claims...more
Our July Insurance Update is here. This is what we discuss. “Hoosier” daddy? When a Little Daddy’s bouncer chased a drunk patron from Big Daddy’s parking lot, who knew it would lead to the Indiana Supreme Court...more
Join us for Hinshaw's Webinar Series: Insurance Insights – What Insurers Need to Know in 2021. This series will feature insurance thought leaders from Hinshaw and RPC, presenting on the most pressing insurance claims topics...more
Under Florida law, similar to that of other states, an insurer’s duty to defend is generally determined solely by the allegations found within the four corners of the complaint. Florida courts, however, recognize an exception...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
Petitioner sought to vacate an arbitration award, arguing that the arbitration panel exceeded its authority in interpreting the terms of an insurance policy when it determined that certain claims fell within the policy’s...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
In a 2017 opinion, Xia v. ProBuilders Specialty Insurance Company, the Washington State Supreme Court analyzed whether an insurer breached its duty of good faith and fair dealing in refusing to defend its contractor insured...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
Illustrating how an insured can counter the insurer’s pollution exclusion arguments in coverage disputes, a federal court in Illinois held that an insured chemical company succeeded in raising genuine issues of material fact...more
The Missouri Supreme Court has unanimously held a pollution exclusion to apply in a dispute between a lead smelting company and one of its insurers. Doe Run Resources Corporation faced litigation alleging that its smelting...more
On August 17, 2017, the Washington Supreme Court declined to reconsider its recent landmark ruling in Xia v. ProBuilders Specialty Insurance Co. RRG, 393 P.3d 748 (Wash. 2017), that an absolute pollution exclusion in an...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
Manufacturers with asbestos liabilities should pay attention to the March 7, 2017, ruling in R.T. Vanderbilt Company v. Hartford Accident and Indemnity Company by the Connecticut Appellate Court. While the court issued...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
Building construction frequently generates silica dust, a substance that can cause lung disease and other respiratory problems. Abrasive sand-blasting or jack hammering as well as concrete drilling and block cutting can lead...more
Recently, the Wisconsin Supreme Court held that the pollution exclusion applies to well water contamination arising from the application of manure to nearby farmland, relieving a general liability insurer of its duty to...more
Pollution Exclusion Doesn’t Bar Coverage for Worker Exposed to Hazardous Chemicals That Were Not “Dispersed”: Why it matters - A federal district court in Texas strictly construed a pollution exclusion in...more