-
June 16, 2026
CHICAGO — An Illinois state judge denied an insured’s motion for summary determination after finding that the Illinois Supreme Court’s ruling that a pollution exclusion can apply as a bar to coverage for emissions that are permitted under Illinois law applies retroactively rather than prospectively.
-
June 16, 2026
LOS ANGELES — An insured maintains in its reply in support of its motion to stay its silica coverage suit pending in California federal court that a stay is warranted until the underlying silica bodily injury suits are resolved but says the stay should be limited to the indemnification and bad faith claims.
-
June 16, 2026
FORT MYERS, Fla. — No coverage is owed to an insured homeowners association and its property management company for an underlying suit stemming from the death of a resident allegedly exposed to toxins and mold while living in a property maintained by the homeowners association and property management company because the policy’s pollution exclusion and pathogen and related hazard exclusion bar coverage, an insurer says in a complaint filed in Florida federal court.
-
June 16, 2026
WEST PALM BEACH, Fla. — A Fourth District Florida Court of Appeal panel reversed a trial court’s dismissal of an insured’s bad faith suit stemming from a dispute over coverage for the collapse of a ceiling in the insured’s restaurant after determining that the action can proceed because the trial court misapplied the precedent on which it relied to dismiss the suit.
-
June 15, 2026
BUFFALO, N.Y. — A federal judge in New York adopted a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation dismissing a subcontractor’s suit against a contractor and its insurer seeking to recoup the costs of remediating water intrusion at a building under construction.
-
June 15, 2026
SCRANTON, Pa. — A breach of contract claim against a homeowners insurer that denied an insured’s water damage claim can proceed because questions of fact exist regarding the timing of the loss and whether the loss was sudden or gradual, a Pennsylvania federal judge said in partially denying the insurer’s motion for summary judgment.
-
June 09, 2026
MINNEAPOLIS — A Minnesota federal judge on June 8 agreed to stay an insurer’s lawsuit for six months to allow a California federal judge to determine whether the California judge’s summary judgment order, entered in a similar lawsuit filed by the insured countertop manufacturer named in hundreds of underlying silica exposure lawsuits, applies to all of the underlying silica lawsuits or only a select number of the underlying suits filed against the insured.
-
June 09, 2026
NEW ORLEANS — Following a district court’s finding on remand that complete diversity of citizenship exists between an insured and the named insurers, the Fifth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on June 8 affirmed the lower court’s summary judgment ruling entered in favor of the insurers, agreeing with the lower court that no coverage is owed pursuant to the policy’s known pollution conditions exclusion for the settlement of an underlying personal injury suit stemming from carbon monoxide exposure.
-
June 09, 2026
BOSTON — Pennsylvania law must be applied in an environmental contamination coverage dispute because Pennsylvania is where the policies were issued and most likely negotiated, a Massachusetts federal judge said in granting the insurer’s motion for partial summary judgment on the choice-of-law issue.
-
June 09, 2026
NEW ORLEANS — The Fifth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals vacated and remanded a district court’s denial of two motions for leave to file an amended complaint filed by the successor company of an insured in a suit seeking coverage for an underlying oil contamination lawsuit because the lower court failed to “articulate its reasoning” as to why the addition of other plaintiffs would be futile.
-
June 08, 2026
JACKSONVILLE, Fla. — A Florida federal judge dismissed claims against four of six insurers sued by a company operating a variety of businesses, including convenience stores, seeking coverage for more than $73 million in alleged COVID-19-related losses, finding that as to the four insurers, the company failed to plead specific facts regarding instances of COVID-19 at a covered location and instead relied on conclusory allegations.
-
June 03, 2026
SAN FRANCISCO — The Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on June 2 denied an umbrella insurer’s petition for panel or en banc rehearing in a dispute over the application of the policies’ annual aggregate limit provision to the insured’s environmental contamination remediation costs, declining to revisit its determination that the annual aggregate limit provision is ambiguous.
-
June 02, 2026
TAMPA, Fla. — A commercial general liability insurer maintains in a complaint filed in Florida federal court that no coverage is owed to its insureds for an underlying wrongful death suit because its policy’s hazardous materials exclusion bars coverage for bear mace that was sprayed by the insureds’ employee while a crowd of patrons was exiting the insured nightclub.
-
June 02, 2026
PORTLAND, Ore. — An Oregon federal judge adopted a magistrate judge’s recommendation to deny an insurer’s motion for judgment on the pleadings in an environmental contamination coverage suit based on the magistrate judge’s finding that questions of fact exist as to whether the policy’s aggregate indemnity limit is exhausted.
-
June 02, 2026
RIVERSIDE, Calif. — An insured, named in an underlying carbon monoxide poisoning suit, is not entitled to a defense or indemnity because coverage is excluded pursuant to a pollution exclusion in the policies at issue, the insurer maintains in a motion for summary judgment filed in California federal court.
-
June 01, 2026
GALVESTON, Texas — Claims for breach of contract, bad faith and violations of Texas law should not proceed against a homeowners insurer because they fail based on the insurer’s payment of an appraisal award, a Texas federal magistrate judge said May 29 in recommending that the insurer’s motion for summary judgment be granted.
-
June 01, 2026
SEATTLE — A Washington federal judge denied motions for summary judgment filed by an insured and a homeowners insurer after determining that questions of fact exist as to whether the insurer’s estimate of the insured’s water loss damages was unreasonably low.
-
May 29, 2026
CINCINNATI — The Sixth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals affirmed a lower federal court’s summary judgment ruling in favor of an insurer in a jewelry store insured’s breach of contract and declaratory judgment lawsuit, holding that the plain, unambiguous language of a policy’s flood carveout to a water backup extension applies to and bars coverage for the insured’s basement flooding following a 2021 rainstorm in Dearborn, Mich.
-
May 26, 2026
NEW YORK — A trial court properly found that no coverage is owed to insureds for an underlying lead paint exposure suit filed by tenants who lived in an insured property because the policy’s known pollution exclusion bars coverage, the First Department New York County Supreme Court Appellate Division determined.
-
May 26, 2026
BATON ROUGE, La. — An insurer urges a Louisiana federal court to deny its insureds’ motion to dismiss, arguing that a determination on the insurer’s duty to indemnify the insureds in underlying mercury bodily injury suits stemming from the decommissioning of a chemical plant would not be premature because no coverage is afforded under the policies.
-
May 26, 2026
INDIANAPOLIS — The Indiana Court of Appeals reversed and remanded a trial court’s summary judgment ruling in favor of an insured after determining that the excess insurer has no coverage obligation for environmental contamination remediation costs because, under a pro-rata allocation method, the yearly cost of the remediation does not exceed the attachment points of the excess policies.
-
May 22, 2026
DAYTON, Ohio — A federal judge in Ohio issued an order of dismissal in a case brought by a company that owns a building in Dayton, Ohio, against its insurer after being notified that the parties settled the case seeking coverage for damage caused by storms; the judge had earlier issued a decision and entry overruling the insurer’s motion for summary judgment, finding that there was a dispute about whether the storm was the sole cause of the damage or whether the improper application of the roof’s liquid-applied roof membrane (LARM) coating and deterioration of the coating at least contributed to the damage.
-
May 21, 2026
WILMINGTON, Del. — Insureds are not entitled to pre-tender defense costs incurred in defending an underlying consolidated class action suit stemming from pollution damage caused by an insured oil refinery in the U.S. Virgin Islands (USVI) because defense costs incurred prior to tendering a claim to an insurer are not available under the applicable USVI law, pre-tender defense costs are not available to insureds, a Delaware state judge said in granting the insurer’s motion for partial summary judgment.
-
May 20, 2026
PADUCAH, Ky. — A reinsurer and a ferrosilicon producer filed summary judgment motions in a Kentucky federal court in a pollution cleanup cost coverage dispute, with the reinsurer seeking dismissal of all claims against it on the basis that it is only an indemnity reinsurer with no contractual duties to the producer and the producer seeking rulings that its insurer and the reinsurer must cover more than $4.6 million in disputed claim costs, plus future regulatory compliance costs, under a pollution legal liability policy.
-
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.