Newsletter RSS

Mealey's Insurance

  • May 22, 2025

    Kentucky Federal Judge Denies Reconsideration Request In Cleanup Costs Dispute

    PADUCAH, Ky. — A federal judge in Kentucky overruled the objections presented in and denied a ferrosilicon producer’s motion for reconsideration of a January ruling that denied the producer’s motion to compel production of documents in a dispute over pollution-related cleanup costs, ruling that the reconsideration motion impermissibly raised new arguments and failed to identify claimed ambiguities in a reinsurance contract between it and an insurer and reinsurer.

  • May 21, 2025

    Panel: Property Owners Seeking Remediation Costs Failed To Exhaust All Remedies

    HARRISBURG, Pa. — The Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court dismissed a petition filed by two property owners seeking review of the Pennsylvania Underground Storage Tank Indemnification Board’s decision that the property owners are entitled to reimbursement of only 42.3% of remediation costs incurred in removing underground storage tanks because the property owners failed to exhaust all administrative remedies before seeking judicial review.

  • May 20, 2025

    Panel Finds No Error In Lower Court’s Coverage Determinations In Asbestos Suit

    COLUMBIA, S.C. — A trial court did not err in making coverage determinations based on two policies produced by a receiver who was appointed to manage asbestos bodily injury claims filed against an insured, because the insurer failed to submit any evidence to support its argument that some of the policies’ terms changed over the years and were not identical to the two policies produced by the receiver, the South Carolina Court of Appeals said.

  • May 20, 2025

    Insured Files Amended Complaint In Silica Dust Exposure Coverage Suit

    LOS ANGELES — An insured filed an amended complaint in California federal court to provide an updated list of the underlying bodily injury suits filed against it stemming from silica dust exposure from the insured’s products and reiterating its claims for breach of contract, bad faith and declaratory judgment against its insurer.

  • May 20, 2025

    Underlying Plaintiff Says Coverage Owed For Disposal Of Construction Debris

    ROCK ISLAND, Ill. — An insurer has a duty to defend its insureds in an underlying suit stemming from the insureds’ alleged improper disposal of construction debris because the underlying suit against the insureds alleges an occurrence for which coverage is afforded under the policy, the underlying plaintiff says in its reply in support of its cross-motion for summary judgment.

  • May 19, 2025

    Coverage Owed For Water Damage, Surplus Lines Insured Says In Amended Complaint

    ATLANTA — A surplus lines insurer breached its contract and acted in bad faith in denying an insured’s claim for damages to a number of apartment units damaged as a result of frozen water pipes that burst, an insured says in its amended complaint filed in Georgia federal court.

  • May 16, 2025

    Meso Claimants, Asbestos Debtor Jointly Drop Appeal Due To Expected Settlement

    RICHMOND, Va. — A Virginia federal judge on May 15 approved a joint stipulation to dismiss an appeal by mesothelioma claimants over a bankruptcy court’s approval of an injunction that bars asbestos claims as part of an $18 million settlement between Chapter 11 debtor Hopeman Brothers Inc. and excess insurers.

  • May 16, 2025

    8th Circuit Affirms Ruling In Insurer’s Favor In Bad Faith Suit Over Storm Damage

    ST. LOUIS — The Eighth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals affirmed a lower federal court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of an insurer in an insured’s assignee’s breach of contract and bad faith lawsuit arising from storm damage, concluding that the insured sought “to advance a novel agency theory on appeal” but there is no reason for the insured’s failure to raise this argument in the lower court and “no manifest injustice in this court declining to entertain the argument for the first time on appeal.”

  • May 12, 2025

    Federal Judge Denies Insurer’s Motion For Judgment In Bad Faith, Lead Injury Suit

    ST. LOUIS — In a May 9 docket note, a Missouri federal judge overruled an insurer’s motion for judgment as a matter of law submitted at the close of evidence in a jury trial on an insured’s claim for bad faith refusal to settle in a coverage dispute over underlying personal injury claims stemming from the insured’s lead-smelting operations.

  • May 12, 2025

    Insured Says Rehearing Of Panel’s Ruling In Contamination Suit Is Warranted

    DENVER — Rehearing of a 10th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel’s decision that insurers have no duty to defend or provide coverage to an insured for an underlying environmental contamination suit based on the insurers’ pollution exclusions is warranted because the panel’s decision is contrary to New Mexico law, the insured maintains in its petition for panel rehearing and rehearing en banc.

  • May 09, 2025

    No Added Weight Should Be Given To Policy Limits In Allocating Costs, Judge Says

    PORTLAND, Ore. — A time-on-the-risk allocation of defense costs in an environmental contamination suit is the appropriate method of allocation, an Oregon federal judge said in applying applicable Oregon law and in rejecting the insurer’s argument that equal or more weight should be given to the insurer’s policies’ limits rather than the insurer’s time on the risk when allocating defense costs.

  • May 09, 2025

    Pool Defect Insurance Case Stayed Pending Further Factual Development

    AUSTIN, Texas — A Texas federal judge has denied dismissal of a pool construction defect insurance lawsuit but granted an alternative motion to stay the case pending further factual development and possible related litigation.

  • May 09, 2025

    Ship Subcontractor Seeks Approvals For Bankruptcy Plan, Disclosure Statement

    RICHMOND, Va. — Defunct ship subcontractor and Chapter 11 debtor Hopeman Brothers Inc. and an asbestos claimants’ committee filed a joint motion asking a Virginia federal bankruptcy judge to schedule a combined hearing to approve the disclosure statement for its proposed plan of reorganization and consider confirmation of the plan, which would establish a trust with insurance proceeds and cash “to allow for resolution of the thousands of asbestos claims against Hopeman.”

  • May 07, 2025

    N.J. Panel Says Trial Court Properly Used Time-On-The-Risk Allocation Method

    TRENTON, N.J. — A panel of the New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division, in applying Massachusetts law, affirmed a trial court’s use of a time-on-the-risk allocation method to determine the amount owed by an umbrella insurer to an insured for environmental contamination remediation costs after determining that the trial court correctly applied the proper Massachusetts precedent that sets forth allocation requirements under Massachusetts law.

  • May 07, 2025

    Coverage Barred For Insured’s Disposal Of Asbestos-Containing Debris, Insurer Says

    ROCK ISLAND, Ill. — No coverage is owed for an underlying suit stemming from the insureds’ alleged improper disposal of construction debris because the policy’s asbestos and pollution exclusions clearly bar coverage, an insurer maintains in a reply in support of its motion for summary judgment and opposition to the underlying plaintiff’s cross-motion for summary judgment.

  • May 06, 2025

    9th Circuit Denies Insurer’s Petition For Rehearing In Contamination Coverage Suit

    SAN FRANCISCO — The Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on May 5 denied an insurer’s petition for panel rehearing in an environmental contamination coverage suit, refusing to reconsider its decision that a jury trial is necessary to determine the reasonableness of the defense costs incurred by the insured from the date of the insured’s tender of the underlying complaint through the date of the trial court’s order.

  • April 30, 2025

    On Remand From Supreme Court, 4th Circuit Approves Kaiser Debtors’ Reorganization

    RICHMOND, Va. — The plan of reorganization of Chapter 11 debtors Kaiser Gypsum Co. Inc. and Hanson Permanente Cement Inc. was proposed in good faith and satisfies the asbestos bankruptcy requirements of Section 524(g) of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code, a Fourth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel held April 29 in affirming the plan’s confirmation on remand from the U.S. Supreme Court.

  • April 30, 2025

    Legionnaires’ Suit Not Subject To Arbitration, Reinsured Entity Says

    DETROIT — A reinsured entity is opposing a motion to dismiss in a Michigan federal court filed by the defendants in a lawsuit over claims related to Legionnaires’ disease, arguing that the defendants improperly invoked an arbitration provision and failed to seek concurrence before filing and that the underlying issues fall outside the arbitration provision because they stem from an unprocured and undisclosed agreement.

  • April 30, 2025

    Fact Issues Remain On Insured’s Extracontractual Claims In Water Damage Dispute

    SEATTLE — An insurer is not entitled to summary judgment on an insured condominium association’s extracontractual claims because questions of fact exist regarding the reasonableness of the insurer’s interpretation of the policy language, the adequacy of the insurer’s claim investigation and the manner in which the insurer maintained the claim file, a Washington federal judge said in denying the insurer’s motion for summary judgment in a water damage coverage dispute.

  • April 28, 2025

    Panel Says No Additional Coverage Owed For Underlying Carbon Monoxide Suit

    SAN FRANCISCO — An insured landlord is not entitled to additional coverage for the settlement of a tenant’s underlying bodily injury suit arising out of carbon monoxide poisoning because the apartment insurance policy’s liability limit applies only to the year in which the occurrence took place, the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals said April 25 in affirming a district court’s finding that the stacking of annual policy limits is prohibited by the policy.

  • April 24, 2025

    Pollution Exclusions Bar Coverage For Contamination Suit, Panel Says In Reversing

    DENVER — Insurers have no duty to defend or provide coverage to an insured for an underlying environmental contamination suit because the insurers’ pollution exclusions clearly bar coverage for the underlying suit, the 10th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals said April 23 in reversing a district court’s ruling.

  • April 23, 2025

    Contractors’ Insurers Appeal Ruling That Subcontractors’ Acts Caused Water Leak

    NEW ORLEANS — A general contractor’s insurers on April 22 filed notice that they are appealing a Louisiana federal judge’s ruling granting summary judgment to two subcontractors who were responsible for installing a heating, ventilation and air conditioning (HVAC) system and the subcontractors’ insurers after finding that the plaintiff insurers failed to show that the subcontractors’ acts or omissions caused or contributed to a water leak in the HVAC system.

  • April 23, 2025

    Underlying Plaintiff Says Asbestos, Pollution Exclusions Do Not Preclude Coverage

    ROCK ISLAND, Ill. — An insurer owes a duty to defend and indemnify its insureds in an underlying suit stemming from the insureds’ alleged improper disposal of construction debris because the policy’s asbestos and pollution exclusions do not bar coverage as the underlying suit alleges other potentially covered claims, the underlying plaintiff maintains in a cross-motion for summary judgment and in a response to the insurer’s motion for summary judgment.

  • April 23, 2025

    Illinois High Court Will Answer Panel’s Certified Question On Pollution Exclusion

    CHICAGO — The Illinois Supreme Court issued an order noting that it will answer a question certified by Seventh Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals that seeks the high court’s input on what effect, if any, a permit or regulation that authorizes emissions has in determining how a pollution exclusion should be applied in a standard commercial general liability policy.

  • April 23, 2025

    Jury Trial Should Not Be Limited To Defense Costs, Insurer Tells 9th Circuit

    SAN FRANCISCO — An insurer filed a petition for panel rehearing in the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals, contending that the panel should modify its recent opinion and remand for a jury trial on all of the damages claimed by an insured in an environmental contamination coverage suit rather than remand only for a jury trial to determine the reasonableness of the defense costs incurred by the insured from the date of the insured’s tender of the underlying complaint through the date of the district court’s order.