Newsletter RSS

Mealey's Insurance

  • March 19, 2025

    Insurers’ Motion For Injunction Denied; Similar Contamination Suit Stayed

    CHARLESTON, W.Va. — A West Virginia federal judge denied a motion for an injunction filed by insurers in an environmental contamination dispute after determining that an injunction is not warranted to enjoin a county from filing similar suits in different forums based on the judge’s stay of the similar lawsuit, which also is pending before the same judge in West Virginia federal court.

  • March 19, 2025

    Insurer Says Pollution Exclusion Bars Coverage For Carbon Monoxide Injury Suits

    DETROIT — No coverage is owed for underlying suits seeking damages for bodily injuries incurred as a result of carbon monoxide poisoning stemming from a malfunctioning pool heater at an insured’s hotel because the excess policy’s pollution exclusion bars coverage for the underlying suits, an excess insurer says in a complaint filed in Michigan federal court.

  • March 18, 2025

    Insurer Opposes Catholic Diocese’s Motion To File Amicus Brief In Contamination Suit

    SAN FRANCISCO — An insurer on March 17 filed an opposition to a California Catholic diocese’s motion for leave to file an amicus curiae brief in an insured’s appeal in a groundwater contamination coverage suit, telling the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals that the diocese should not be granted leave to file an amicus brief because the diocese’s arguments are not relevant to the contamination coverage dispute at issue.

  • March 18, 2025

    Panel Says Underlying Asbestos Suits Are Covered Under Premises-Operations Policies

    FORT WORTH, Texas — The Second District Texas Court of Appeals affirmed a trial court’s ruling that an insurer has a continued duty to defend its insured against underlying asbestos bodily injury lawsuits because the trial court properly found that the underlying allegations fall within the policies’ premises-operations coverage and the insurer failed to show that its policies have been exhausted.

  • March 18, 2025

    Insurer Says Pollution Exclusion Bars Coverage For Cleanup Costs

    MUSKOGEE, Okla. — No coverage is owed to an insured for an underlying suit seeking payment for cleanup and environmental services following an accident involving the insured because the policy's pollution exclusion and trucking exclusion bar coverage for the underlying suit, an insurer argues in its complaint filed in Oklahoma federal court.

  • March 17, 2025

    Parties Reach Settlement After Ruling In Coverage Dispute Over Water Damage

    NEW YORK — Three days after a federal judge in New York found that the undisputed record is clear that an insured’s alleged interior water damage to its two-story commercial office building falls squarely within an insurance policy's anti-concurrent causation clause, the parties on March 14 announced that they reached a settlement.

  • March 11, 2025

    Insured Says Reimbursement Owed For Underlying Water Contamination Complaints

    LOS ANGELES — An insured company filed suit in California federal court against its general liability insurer, claiming that the insurer’s refusal to defend it or reimburse it for costs incurred in defending itself against two water contamination suits was a breach of contract and a breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing.

  • March 11, 2025

    Trial Court Properly Found Insurer Was Prevailing Party In Water Damage Suit

    FRANKFORT, Ky. — A trial court did not err in determining that a homeowners insurer was the prevailing party in a water damage coverage dispute because the insureds agreed to dismiss their breach of contract claim prior to trial and the insureds failed to prove their claims for bad faith and violation of the Kentucky Consumer Protection Act (KCPA), the Kentucky Court of Appeals said.

  • March 11, 2025

    Vermont High Court Affirms Quash Of Insurer Subpoena In J&J Talc Coverage Suit

    MONTPELIER, Vt. — An insurer trying to escape liability for a verdict against Johnson & Johnson (J&J) in an asbestos-talc bodily injury mass tort litigation improperly served an out-of-state subpoena on a regulatory department for information filed by the company’s captive insurance company without first establishing that the information it sought was not available from other nonconfidential sources, the Vermont Supreme Court found, upholding a trial court's decision to quash the subpoena.

  • March 11, 2025

    Insured’s Water Damage Suit Properly Dismissed For Lack Of Ripeness, Panel Says

    PASADENA, Calif. — A district court properly dismissed an insured’s breach of contract and bad faith suit stemming from a water damage coverage dispute because the insured’s claims are not ripe based on a petition filed by the property insurer in Rhode Island state court to appoint an umpire to conduct an appraisal proceeding, the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals said in affirming the lower court’s ruling.

  • March 11, 2025

    Pollution Exclusion Bars Coverage For Insured’s Contamination Claims

    NEW YORK — A New York County Supreme Court justice granted a motion for summary judgment filed by insurers in an environmental contamination coverage suit after determining that the pollution exclusion in the various insurers’ policies bars coverage for the environmental contamination and that the sudden and accidental exception to the exclusion does not apply to provide coverage for the contamination.

  • March 10, 2025

    COMMENTARY: Sustainability Recalibration: What Insurers And Policyholders Should Know About ESG (Environmental, Social, and Governance Considerations) Under Trump 2.0, Part 2

    By Scott M. Seaman

  • March 10, 2025

    Reinsurance Dispute Closed After Parties Agree To Dismiss All Claims

    OMAHA, Neb. — A federal judge in Nebraska dismissed with prejudice a suit involving a reinsurance contract and a settlement with the state of Montana over alleged asbestos exposures, following a joint stipulation between the parties to dismiss all claims.

  • March 05, 2025

    ‘Plausible’ Interpretations Doom Summary Judgment Bids In Reinsurance Row

    WHITE PLAINS, N.Y. — Calling both sides’ interpretations of facultative reinsurance certificates “plausible,” a New York federal judge denied competing summary judgment motions in a breach of contract suit involving a confidential environmental losses settlement.

  • March 04, 2025

    Illinois Federal Judge Enters Default Against Insureds In Debris Disposal Suit

    ROCK ISLAND, Ill. — An Illinois federal judge entered an order of default against insureds who failed to respond to the insurer’s second amended complaint, which seeks a declaration that its policy’s asbestos exclusion and pollution exclusion bar coverage for the alleged improper disposal of construction debris by the insured.

  • March 04, 2025

    Silica Exposure Lawsuits Involve More Than 1 Occurrence, Insured Says In Complaint

    NEW YORK — A commercial general liability insurer breached its contract and acted in bad faith by determining that more than 100 underlying silica exposure lawsuits filed against the insured are subject to coverage under only one insurance policy and involve only a single occurrence under the policy, an insured alleges in a complaint filed in New York federal court.

  • March 04, 2025

    Insurer’s Complaint In Asbestos Coverage Dispute Properly Dismissed, Panel Says

    ST. LOUIS — A commercial umbrella liability insurer’s complaint seeking a declaration that it no longer has a duty to defend or indemnify its insured for underlying asbestos bodily injury suits was properly dismissed based on the doctrine of claim preclusion because the insurer’s defense and indemnity obligations were already decided by the Missouri state court in a similar suit filed by the insured, the Eighth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals said.

  • March 04, 2025

    COMMENTARY: Sustainability Recalibration: What Insurers And Policyholders Should Know About ESG (Environmental, Social, and Governance Considerations) Under Trump 2.0, Part 1

    By Scott M. Seaman

  • March 04, 2025

    Pollution Exclusion Bars Coverage For Contamination Suit, Magistrate Judge Says

    SAN ANTONIO, Texas — A Texas federal magistrate judge recommended granting an insurer’s motion for summary judgment as it applies to the insurer’s duty to defend because a policy’s pollution exclusion bars coverage for an underlying environmental contamination lawsuit filed against the insured.

  • March 03, 2025

    Pollution Exclusion Does Not Bar Coverage For Carbon Monoxide Death

    ANCHORAGE, Alaska — Answering a certified question from the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals, the Alaska Supreme Court determined that a pollution exclusion does not bar coverage for the carbon monoxide death of a 17-year-old because it was reasonable for the insureds to expect that coverage would be afforded based on a reading of the pollution exclusion.

  • March 03, 2025

    Homeowner Amends Complaint Against Insurer In Black Mold Coverage Suit

    ABERDEEN, Miss. — Consistent with a Mississippi federal judge’s order, an insured homeowner filed an amended complaint against her homeowners insurer, clarifying the date on which the insured was forced to move out of her home as a result of black mold growth.

  • February 25, 2025

    Florida Panel Affirms Ruling In Insurer’s Favor In Coronavirus Coverage Suit

    MIAMI — A Florida appeals panel on Feb. 19 affirmed a lower court’s judgment in favor of an insurer in an insured’s declaratory judgment lawsuit seeking coverage for its business interruption losses as a result of the coronavirus pandemic, concluding that nothing in the record supports the insured’s contention that the governmental shutdown orders “were issued ‘due to’ specific conditions at the premises of the Insured.”

  • February 25, 2025

    Hydrofracking Exclusion Does Not Bar Coverage For Suits Arising Out Of Explosion

    MIDLAND, Texas — A Texas federal judge entered judgment in favor of an insured in a dispute over reimbursement for underlying lawsuits arising out of an explosion at a saltwater facility after determining that the insurer failed to show that a jury verdict in favor of the insured was against the weight of the evidence and after determining that the policy’s hydrofracking exclusion does not bar coverage for the underlying suits.

  • February 24, 2025

    Insured Says Allocation To Excess Insurer In Contamination Suit Was Proper

    SEATTLE — A trial court correctly found that an insured was permitted to allocate more than $500,000 in defense costs incurred for environmental contamination liabilities to an excess insurer because the timing of the allocation of the defense costs was appropriate based on the timing of a decision a prior appeal filed by the insured, the insured says in a response brief filed in the Division I Washington Court of Appeals.

  • February 24, 2025

    Fact Issues Exist On Policy’s Water, Preexisting Damage Exclusions, Judge Says

    TAMPA, Fla. — A Florida federal judge partially denied a commercial property insurer’s motion for summary judgment after determining that questions of fact exist as to whether the policy’s repeated leakage of water exclusion and preexisting damage exclusion bar coverage for additional damages sought by an insured for water damages within its building.