-
May 29, 2026
SAN JOSE, Calif. — A California appeals court panel affirmed a lower court’s summary judgment ruling in favor of an excess errors and omissions insurer in Zoom Video Communications Inc.’s breach of contract lawsuit seeking coverage for the more than $6.6 million it paid to resolve a Federal Trade Commission (FTC) investigation and the $85 million that it paid to settle civil lawsuits challenging its data security practices, holding that the FTC’s civil investigative demand (CID) was not a claim to trigger coverage under the policy.
-
May 29, 2026
SAN FRANCISCO — An insured’s breach of contract and bad faith claims cannot proceed against an insurer because the insurer satisfied the conditions of a personal articles policy when it issued and mailed payments on claims for lost jewelry made by one of the insureds, a California federal judge said in granting the insurer’s motion to dismiss.
-
May 28, 2026
SANTA ANA, Calif. — A federal judge in California granted an employment practices liability insurer’s motion to dismiss a construction company insured’s breach of contract and bad faith lawsuit seeking coverage for an underlying action seeking redress of false claims and alleging prevailing wage law violations, holding that the underlying claims are not employment claims brought by or on behalf of employees to trigger coverage under the policy.
-
May 28, 2026
LOS ANGELES — California Insurance Commissioner Ricardo Lara argues in an opposition brief filed in a California state court that a consumer research and advocacy organization’s petition to invalidate regulatory bulletins authorizing California FAIR Plan assessment cost pass-throughs should be denied because the bulletins only explain the prior-approval process for temporary supplemental fees and do not conflict with the FAIR Plan proportional-sharing requirement because that provision governs only the FAIR Plan’s internal affairs rather than member insurers’ relationships with policyholders.
-
May 22, 2026
SAN FRANCISCO — A general contractor’s insurer urged the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals to reverse a lower court’s judgment in favor of a subcontractor’s insurer, arguing that because the general contractor is an additional insured under the subcontractor’s policy, the subcontractor’s insurer had a duty to defend the contractor in an underlying suit against the contractor for damages allegedly caused by the subcontractor’s work.
-
May 22, 2026
SAN FRANCISCO — A construction manager says that the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals should reverse a lower court judge’s order granting its insurers’ motion for summary judgment, arguing that the judge misinterpreted the meaning of the phrase “during the course of construction” in its policy’s course of construction exclusion (COCE) when the judge concluded that the insurers owed no duty to defend the construction manager in an underlying case regarding issues with the laying of concrete flooring.
-
May 20, 2026
LOS ANGELES — A federal judge in California granted in part and denied in part an insurer’s motion to dismiss Guess? Inc.’s lawsuit seeking coverage under foreign insurance policies for five underlying actions, holding that contrary to the insurer’s argument, two of the three underlying suits are ripe for adjudication.
-
May 20, 2026
LOS ANGELES — Coming down on one side of “a split of authority” by concluding that an employee welfare benefit plan appointment of claim fiduciary form (ACF) “is a Plan document,” a California federal judge gave a long-term disability (LTD) beneficiary a win on one of the three issues she raised in the dispute over her covered earnings.
-
May 19, 2026
LOS ANGELES — An insured filed a motion to stay its silica coverage suit pending in California federal court until the underlying silica bodily injury suits are resolved, noting that a stay would prevent the insured from having to litigate on two fronts.
-
May 18, 2026
LOS ANGELES — After a jury awarded a company damages in a case it brought against its insurer for declaratory judgment over coverage of damage to its apartment building when it was being reroofed, a federal judge in California issued a more than $2.7 million judgment and granted the company’s request for prejudgment interest.
-
May 15, 2026
LOS ANGELES — A cosmetic company insured and its commercial general liability insurer told a California federal court that they have reached a conditional settlement of the insured’s action seeking coverage for three underlying putative class action lawsuits alleging that the company deceptively sold beauty products by failing to disclose the dangerous risks and side effects of lash enhancement serums’ “key ingredient.”
-
May 13, 2026
LOS ANGELES — A California federal judge denied a homeowners insurer’s motion to dismiss bad faith, declaratory relief and unfair competition law (UCL) claims alleged by insureds who seek coverage for damages to their home and contents caused by wildfire smoke and ash because the insureds adequately allege that the insurer withheld benefits in bad faith, that a coverage dispute exists and that ongoing coverage may be owed.
-
May 13, 2026
SAN FRANCISCO — Rejecting a claimant’s argument that under California law the de novo standard of review should apply even though the insurer is afforded discretion under the policy, a California federal judge granted partial summary judgment for the defendant in a suit challenging denial of long-term disability (LTD) benefits, ruling that “the choice of law to be applied is North Carolina and the standard of review is abuse of discretion.”
-
May 12, 2026
SAN FRANCISCO — The Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals should grant a petition for panel or en banc rehearing in a dispute over coverage for environmental contamination remediation costs because the panel’s finding that an annual aggregate limit provision in the umbrella liability insurer’s policies is ambiguous conflicts with a prior decision issued by the Ninth Circuit, the insurer says in its petition.
-
May 11, 2026
LOS ANGELES — An interlocutory appeal is warranted in a silica exposure coverage suit because a California federal judge’s order denying a motion for judgment on the pleadings filed by the insurers involves questions of law regarding the scope and application of silica exclusions in the insurers’ policies, the insurers say in a motion for certification of interlocutory appeal.
-
May 06, 2026
SAN FRANCISCO — A federal judge in California issued a pretrial order on an insurer’s declaratory relief claims and the insured’s remaining counterclaims for breach of contract, violation of California Business and Professions Code Section 17200 and declaratory relief five days after ruling on cross-motions for summary judgment that the insurer had a continuing duty to defend its insured even after the defamation claim in the underlying lawsuit was dismissed.
-
May 06, 2026
OAKLAND, Calif. — The California Department of Insurance accused an insurer of 432 violations following an examination and investigation into its handling of claims arising from the Eaton and Palisades fires in Los Angeles County and ordered the insurer to show cause why it should not have to pay a monetary penalty under California Insurance Code Section 790.035 for its unfair claims settlement practices.
-
May 05, 2026
LOS ANGELES — The United States of America filed a statement of interest in a lawsuit filed by California homeowners affected by the Los Angeles wildfires against their insurers for violations of the state’s Cartwright Act and unfair competition law (UCL), negligence and fraud, noting that although the action asserts only state competition law claims, the United States has a strong interest because the alleged conduct by the insurers “presents a serious concern under the federal antitrust laws.”
-
May 04, 2026
SAN JOSE, Calif. — A trial court erred in granting summary judgment to an agricultural business insurer on breach of contract and declaratory relief claims because issues of fact exist as to whether additional coverage is owed under the policy for the death of the insured’s sea snails, which occurred after a power outage stemming from nearby wildfires, the California Sixth District Court of Appeal said in partially reversing the trial court’s ruling.
-
April 29, 2026
LOS ANGELES — An insurer alleges in a California federal court that multiple companies breached guaranty agreements by failing to reimburse more than $5 million owed under a 2019 reinsurance agreement after a reinsurer defaulted and failed to indemnify the insurer.
-
April 28, 2026
SAN FRANCISCO — The Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals reversed a district court’s ruling in a dispute over coverage for environmental contamination remediation costs after determining that an annual aggregate limit provision in an umbrella liability insurer’s policies is ambiguous and must be construed in favor of coverage for the insured.
-
April 28, 2026
LOS ANGELES — An insurer maintains that reconsideration of a California federal judge’s finding that the insurer has a duty to defend its insured for underlying silica bodily injury suits is necessary because the judge failed to consider the total pollution exclusion in the insurer’s policies under the most recent and applicable California authority.
-
April 28, 2026
LOS ANGELES — Arguing that two regulatory bulletins unlawfully authorize insurers to shift California FAIR Plan assessment costs onto policyholders, a consumer research and advocacy organization contends in a California state court that the pass-through structure effectuated by the bulletins conflicts with the governing proportional-sharing mandate and cannot be sustained under the state’s insurance ratemaking framework.
-
April 24, 2026
SAN FRANCISCO — A paint contractor’s insurer agreed to voluntarily dismiss its claims against a property owner’s insurer in a declaratory judgment case the contractor’s insurer brought seeking a declaration that it did not have a duty to defend and indemnify the contractor or others in underlying actions stemming from a fire that damaged property in San Francisco.
-
April 24, 2026
SAN FRANCISCO — In its appeal of a lower court’s ruling that an insurer owed no duty to indemnify its subcontractor in an underlying suit, a contractor has asked the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals to address an issue it says has not been addressed under California insurance coverage law — whether an indemnitee must file a suit against an indemnitor before an insurer’s duty to indemnify is triggered.