-
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.
-
April 24, 2026
LOS ANGELES — The California Fair Plan Association (CFP) said it is appealing a California court’s grant of summary adjudication in favor of an insured as to his sole remaining claim for declaratory relief in his lawsuit alleging that CFP issued property insurance policies with fire coverage that is unlawfully restrictive as to smoke damage claims.
-
April 22, 2026
SANTA ANA, Calif. — After receiving a notice of settlement, a federal judge in California on April 21 issued a docket-only order dismissing without prejudice an action brought by a construction company against its subcontractor’s insurer for damages the company alleged were caused by using the subcontractor’s drawings for the project.
-
April 22, 2026
LOS ANGELES — A federal judge in California denied an insurer’s motion to reconsider the judge’s grant of summary judgment to developers in the developers’ case seeking coverage for construction defects and granted the developer’s motion for entry of final judgment against the insurer, finding the motion for reconsideration to be untimely and, because that motion was denied, that the motion for entry of final judgment should be granted.
-
April 17, 2026
LOS ANGELES — Reconsideration of a California federal judge’s finding that an insurer has a duty to defend its insured for underlying silica bodily injury suits is not warranted because the insurer repeats the same arguments presented in its summary judgment briefing and already rejected by the court, the insured maintains in response to the insurer’s motion.
-
April 16, 2026
SAN JOSE, Calif. — Finding in part that the defendants “abused their discretion by ignoring all the evidence provided by Plaintiff’s treating physicians,” a California federal magistrate judge issued a mixed ruling in an Employee Retirement Income Security Act suit filed by a former software engineer who challenged the termination of his benefits under two short-term disability (STD) plans and argued that he was also entitled to long-term disability (LTD) benefits.
-
April 15, 2026
LOS ANGELES — No coverage is owed to an insured for a power outage stemming from water leaking into a vault where electrical equipment is stored because the all-risk policy’s exclusion for repeated or continuous water leakage applies as a bar to coverage, the Second District California Court of Appeal said in affirming a trial court’s judgment.
-
April 15, 2026
SANTA ANA, Calif. — A federal magistrate judge in California granted a renters insurer’s motion for judgment on the pleadings in its lawsuit seeking a declaratory judgment that it has no duty to defend or indemnify its insured against an underlying negligence lawsuit brought by a Los Angeles County police officer, ruling that the pleadings demonstrate that the insured’s deliberate conduct caused the police officer harm and that whether the insured intended to cause the injury is immaterial.
-
April 13, 2026
LOS ANGELES — An insured is owed a defense for underlying bodily injury suits stemming from exposure to silica and other toxins in the insured’s stone products because the underlying suits contain allegations that fall outside of the policies’ silica exclusion, a California federal judge said in denying the insurers’ motion for judgment on the pleadings.
-
April 13, 2026
LOS ANGELES — A California federal judge denied a motion for judgment on the pleadings filed by insurers seeking a declaration that no coverage is owed to an insured for underlying silica exposure personal injury suits because the silica exclusion cannot apply as the underlying plaintiffs allege that substances other than silica may have caused their injuries.
-
April 10, 2026
SACRAMENTO, Calif. — Following de novo review that focused on a neuropsychological evaluation and a functional capacity evaluation (FCE), a California federal judge overturned the termination of a registered nurse’s long-term disability (LTD) benefits under an any-occupation definition of disability.
-
April 08, 2026
OAKLAND, Calif. — A federal magistrate judge in California denied an insurer and claims administrator’s motion to dismiss an insured’s breach of contract and bad faith claims in her lawsuit seeking flood coverage for damage to her San Anselmo, Calif., home caused by a rainstorm, but granted the defendants’ motion to dismiss the insured’s claims for unfair competition, intentional misrepresentation, punitive damages, restitution, disgorgement and injunctive relief.
-
April 07, 2026
SAN FRANCISCO — A California federal magistrate judge found that no coverage is owed to an insured for one of many underlying lawsuits filed against it alleging injuries related to exposure to per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) allegedly contained in aqueous film-forming foams (AFFF) that were manufactured and sold by the insured after determining that the underlying suit at issue involves exposure that occurred decades before the insured’s existence.
-
April 07, 2026
SAN FRANCISCO — An insured’s breach of contract and bad faith suit filed against its environmental liability insurer after the insurer denied coverage for lost rental income incurred as a result of lead and asbestos abatement work cannot proceed because the insured failed to file suit within the applicable four-year statute of limitations, a California federal judge said in granting the insurer’s motion for judgment on the pleadings.
-
April 06, 2026
LOS ANGELES — Reconsideration of a California federal judge’s finding that an insurer has a duty to defend its insured for underlying silica bodily injury suits is warranted because the judge failed to address controlling California authority that is relevant to the application of a total pollution exclusion in the insurer’s policies as opposed to an absolute pollution exclusion, the insurer contends in a motion to reconsider.
-
April 02, 2026
OAKLAND, Calif. — Resolving a standard of review disagreement by applying the federal choice-of-law rule, a California federal judge determined that “Massachusetts law applies and . . . California’s prohibition on discretionary clauses does not” so he will assess the denial of the plaintiff’s claim for long-term disability (LTD) benefits for abuse of discretion rather than de novo.
-
April 01, 2026
OAKLAND, Calif. — Ruling in favor of a plaintiff with multiple sclerosis (MS) who received long-term disability (LTD) benefits for more than 11 years before they were terminated, a California federal judge concluded on de novo review that “the preponderance of the evidence shows that” the former national account sales manager “could not perform any gainful occupation that requires sedentary occupational demands because of physical symptoms of MS in his legs” at the time of the termination.
-
April 01, 2026
SAN JOSE, Calif. — A California federal judge granted an insurer’s motion for default judgment in its declaratory judgment suit against its insured related to underlying wrongful death litigation, finding that under the policy’s business description endorsement, the insurer has no duty to defend and indemnify in the underlying suit and that rescission is appropriate because of “the material misrepresentations” in the insured’s application for insurance.
-
April 01, 2026
SANTA MONICA, Calif. — A California jury reached a special verdict on a breach of contract claim brought against an insurer by the producers of the Netflix show “House of Cards,” finding that the producers failed to prove that they incurred a loss by spending more than they originally budgeted for the show because actor Kevin Spacey was rendered unable to complete his performance on the show due to “sickness.”
-
March 30, 2026
LOS ANGELES — No coverage is owed to an insured for underlying bodily injury lawsuits stemming from exposure to silica dust created by the cutting of stone countertops because the claims alleged in the underlying suits are barred by the policies’ employer’s liability exclusion and pollution exclusion, the insurer says in a complaint filed in California federal court.