Federal court applies Oregon statute to approve “good faith” settlement in environmental insurance litigation
Coverage litigation stemming from continuous or progressive property damage or bodily injury claims typically involves multiple insurers that issued liability policies over a number of years. One or more of those insurers may want to [...]
Insurer’s claim denial may violate state consumer-protection statutes even when the insurer has no duty to defend
As I wrote in an earlier blog post (see my August 10, 2015 article here), insurers have a duty to defend their policyholders against any potentially covered loss, which means that insurers are required to [...]
Florida Court of Appeal case serves as a reminder to be mindful of how claims are pleaded
A recent opinion out of the Fourth District Court of Appeal in Florida highlights the importance of properly pleading claims so that insurance coverage is triggered. In Mid-Continent Cas. Co. v. Royal Crane, LLC, Cloutier [...]
Interpreting “vandalism” shows how ambiguity works in insurance-coverage disputes
Intention can be a tricky concept in many areas of the law, from criminal prosecutions to insurance-coverage cases, as illustrated in a recent California case, Hung Van Ong v. Fire Ins. Exchange (Apr. 3, 2015). The Ong [...]
Oregon’s broad duty to defend extends to “additional insureds”
On August 19, 2015, the Oregon Court of Appeals issued its opinion in West Hills Development Co. v. Chartis Claims, Inc., reaffirming the broad nature of an insurer’s duty to defend, even when that duty [...]
California court confirms that any “potentially covered” loss triggers the duty to defend
When threatened with a lawsuit, an insured’s first call is often to his or her insurer, asking the insurer to hire lawyers to defend the lawsuit. All too often the insurer’s initial response is that [...]
Insureds should be careful not to release an entire policy
Rather than litigating the amount of coverage, an insured may — and often does — settle the claim. The insured may do this for a variety of reasons, including wanting to avoid the time and [...]
Oregon Supreme Court enforces indemnity provisions, but only to a point
The Oregon Supreme Court recently addressed an issue that has been the source of significant uncertainty in construction disputes: the extent to which construction agreements can require subcontractors to indemnify general contractors for damages caused [...]
Ninth Circuit clarifies that one “known loss” doesn’t mean you know them all
In Kaady v. Mid-Continent Casualty Co. (June 25, 2015), the Ninth Circuit recently spurned an insurer’s attempt to conflate two separate losses in an attempt to deny coverage on the grounds that the insured’s pre-policy [...]
Washington Supreme Court adopts pro-policyholder interpretation of “collapse” in a property policy
Today, the Washington Supreme Court provided much needed relief for policyholders faced with buildings that are structurally impaired, but have not yet actually fallen down. In Queen Anne Park Homeowners Ass’n v. State Farm Fire [...]