-
July 24, 2026
TAMPA, Fla. — In addressing cross-motions for summary judgment, a federal magistrate judge in Florida held that because defective concrete pavers at an RV park did not cause injury to other tangible property, an insurer had no duty to defend a concrete paver company in an underlying dispute brought against it over the defective pavers.
-
July 24, 2026
WEST PALM BEACH, Fla. — A federal magistrate judge recommended that a construction company’s breach of contract claim against an insurer should not be dismissed because it involves payment for work already performed under an assignment of insurance benefits that was entered into years after the work was completed.
-
July 24, 2026
MIAMI — A design-build contractor filed objections to the report and recommendation of a a federal magistrate judge in Florida, agreeing that its excess insurers’ motion to dismiss the contractor’s breach of contract complaint over coverage for faulty bridge design calculations should be denied but arguing that the parties should not be compelled to participate in the alternative dispute resolution (ADR) process required by the lead excess insurance policy’s limitation of liability endorsement before proceeding with litigation.
-
July 24, 2026
CINCINNATI — After removing from an amended opinion its holding that insurers must show prejudice from an insured’s failure to comply with a preloss coverage condition, a Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals panel dismissed as moot the insurers’ petition for rehearing and rehearing en banc in a builder’s risk coverage dispute over a fire that burned down a building during renovations.
-
July 24, 2026
LOS ANGELES — After an insurer and interior designer announced that they had reached a settlement, a federal judge in California issued an order of dismissal in the insurer’s case seeking a declaration that it did not owe the interior designer a defense in an underlying action brought against the designer for negligence alleging that the designer’s improper selection of materials resulted in property damage.
-
July 24, 2026
SCRANTON, Pa. — An insurer argued in a reply supporting its second motion for summary judgment that a federal court in Pennsylvania’s earlier ruling in a water damage coverage dispute did not address the policy’s suit requirement or the applicability of policy exclusions. The case was brought by a modular apartment unit manufacturer for water damage allegedly caused by its subcontractor’s work.
-
July 24, 2026
CHICAGO — A federal judge in Illinois dismissed with prejudice an insurer’s third-party complaint against another insurer seeking equitable subrogation in a case brought by a developer seeking coverage for an underlying case against it alleging that construction defects resulted in water damage to a residential townhome project.
-
July 24, 2026
RIVERSIDE, Calif. — A general contractor and an insurer filed a joint stipulation to dismiss the contractor’s complaint against the insurer for breach of contract over the insurer’s denial of the contractor’s claims for coverage and a defense in homeowners’ underlying suit against it alleging that their home incurred water intrusion.
-
July 24, 2026
ORLANDO, Fla. — A federal magistrate judge in Florida declined to award supplemental relief in favor of a homebuilder in an insurer’s lawsuit regarding coverage for construction-related damages at a condominium development, finding a number of disputed issues need to be addressed, such as whether the insurer materially breached the policy.
-
July 23, 2026
FORT MYERS, Fla. — A federal judge in Florida granted a subcontractor’s motion to dismiss a roofer’s negligence claim in a third-party complaint within an action over insurance coverage for damage from roofing repairs the subcontractor performed, finding that the claim is barred by the independent tort doctrine because it is not separate from the roofer’s breach of contract claim.
-
July 23, 2026
HARRISONBURG, Va. — A federal judge in Virginia found there were too many unanswered material questions for him to grant cross-motions for partial summary judgment filed by a property owner and an insurer in the property owner’s suit for coverage of an underlying dispute over damage to adjacent property due to excavation work done on the subject property.
-
July 23, 2026
PHILADELPHIA — A federal judge in Pennsylvania dismissed claims brought by an insurer, as subrogee for a general contractor, against a property inspector for negligence for the inspector’s alleged failure to identify several defects in a subcontractor’s work, finding that the claims were barred by res judicata because the same claims had been voluntarily dismissed in a state court case brought against the inspector by the general contractor.
-
July 14, 2026
CHICAGO — A Seventh Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel affirmed a lower court’s ruling that an insurer had no duty to defend or indemnify a roofing contractor in an underlying suit alleging that the contractor’s negligent repair work contributed to the collapse of a building’s façade, killing two people.
-
July 09, 2026
MUSKOGEE, Okla. — A federal magistrate judge in Oklahoma granted an insurer’s motion for summary judgment in a contractor’s action alleging breach of good faith and fair dealing after the insurer denied coverage for an underlying water damage arising from the contractor’s roof work, finding that an open structure water damage exclusion precluded coverage.
-
July 06, 2026
NEW HAVEN, Conn. — A federal judge in Connecticut found that an insurer owed no coverage for an underlying construction defect case because the insured contractor’s misstatements in the policy application made the policy void ab initio, granting the insurer’s motion for summary judgment as to the owners of the subject property in the insurer’s declaratory judgment action.
-
June 30, 2026
NEWARK, N.J. — A federal judge in New Jersey granted an insurer’s motion to dismiss an insured’s action against it after the insurer denied coverage for an underlying suit related to the insured’s architectural work, finding that the policy covered claims arising from the insured’s prior work only if the insured had previously had continuous insurance coverage, and the insured had been without coverage for three months before purchasing the subject policy.
-
June 30, 2026
PHILADELPHIA — A policy’s pollution exclusion bars coverage for the infiltration of dust into an insured home because dust qualifies as an irritant or contaminant, which are excluded causes of loss under the exclusion, a Pennsylvania federal judge said in granting the homeowners insurer’s motion for summary judgment.
-
June 23, 2026
NEW YORK — Finding that claims that an insured debris removal company and its principal made material misrepresentations in insurance policy applications are time-barred, a New York federal judge granted summary judgment to the company and its principal in the insurer’s suit seeking rescission and a declaration that it does not have a duty to defend or indemnify in underlying actions.
-
June 23, 2026
CINCINNATI — A property owner is asking the Sixth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals not to grant its insurers’ petition for rehearing or rehearing en banc after a panel held that the insurers owed the property owner coverage for a fire that burned down a building during renovations, arguing that in Ohio, insurance provisions that result in forfeiture require a showing of prejudice.
-
June 19, 2026
PRESCOTT, Ariz. — A federal judge in Arizona held that water intrusion that caused damage to an apartment complex constituted multiple occurrences because the intrusion affected the property in different areas at different times and, therefore, certain of a carpentry company’s insurers should pay more toward a settlement the company entered to resolve claims stemming from alleged defects in its work that caused the water intrusion to account for the multiple occurrences.
-
June 19, 2026
FORT MYERS, Fla. — A roofing company filed in Florida federal court its opposition to a subcontractor’s motion to dismiss a negligence claim in a third-party complaint within an action over insurance coverage for damage from roofing repairs the subcontractor performed, arguing that the subcontractor’s required duty of care is not dependent on its alleged breach of contract.
-
June 19, 2026
SAN FRANCISCO — A federal judge in California granted an excess insurer’s motion for summary judgment in a developer’s breach of contract case against it, finding that the insurer did not breach the insurance contract by not participating in mediation proceedings the developer conducted with homeowners who reported construction defects because there was no suit to defend against.
-
June 19, 2026
NEW YORK — A federal judge in New York dismissed a construction manager’s case against a subcontractor’s insurers seeking coverage for the faulty work allegedly done by the subcontractor after being notified that the construction manager and the insurers had settled all claims in the case.
-
June 19, 2026
SANTA ANA, Calif. — A California appellate panel held that a developer could not recover against an insurer for settlements it entered into in a construction defect lawsuit because the insurer had not been provided notice of the suit until after the developer had entered into the settlements, affirming the judgment entered in favor of the insurer.
-
June 19, 2026
DENVER — A contractor’s insurer in an appellee brief urges the 10th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals to affirm a lower court’s grant of summary judgment in its favor in a townhome management company’s suit against the insurer alleging bad faith, arguing that the Nunn agreement between the company and the contractor to settle an underlying action was the result of collusion and does not require a jury trial to determine its enforceability.