An Indiana federal district court recently granted summary judgment on the ground that an insurer had no duty under a CGL policy to indemnify its insured, a general contractor, in a suit premised on alleged faulty workmanship of the insured’s subcontractors. 
Read More Damages Caused To Component Parts By Subcontractors’ Deficient Work Is Not “Property Damage” Caused By An Occurrence”

The New Jersey Superior Court, Appellate Division recently held that a pollution exclusion contained in a D&O liability policy does not bar coverage for shareholder claims alleging fraudulent statements in SEC disclosures concerning alleged pollution. 


Read More New Jersey Appeals Court Holds Pollution Exclusion Does Not Apply to D&O Claim Related to Asbestos Disclosures

A Pennsylvania state court recently held that an insurer had not waived a defense by failing to specifically reference it in a coverage denial letter because the letter contained a “catch-all” provision reserving the insurer’s rights to raise other coverage defenses and issues. 
Read More Court Finds That Insurer Did Not Waive Defense In Its Denial Letter Due to “Catch-all” Statement

In Otto v. Physicians Ins. Co. of Wisconsin Inc., 751 N.W.2d 805 (Wisc. 2008), a sharply divided Wisconsin Supreme Court affirmed a default judgment entered against an insurer for damages allegedly caused by its co-defendant insureds’ negligence, even though no finding had been made as to the insureds’ liability for the damages at issue. 
Read More Wisconsin Supreme Court Awards Nearly $1 Million Default Judgment Against Insurer That Failed to Timely Answer

A Pennsylvania federal court recently ruled that a group of defendant insurers in an asbestos coverage case would not be permitted to join a number of additional insurers as defendants in the action as their request for joinder was untimely. 


Read More Pennsylvania Federal Court Bars As Untimely Insurers’ Attempt to Join Additional Insurers in Asbestos Coverage Case

The First Circuit Court of Appeals recently held that the fraud and dishonesty exclusion in an errors and omissions policy issued to a mortgage originator and broker excluded coverage for the fraudulent acts of one of its employees in the loan origination process. 
Read More Mortgage Broker’s E&O Policy Excludes Coverage for Fraudulent Acts of Its Employee in Connection with Subprime Mortgage Loan Application and Documents

The United States District Court for the Northern District of California recently held that a securities fraud claim related back to a notice of circumstances given by the insured to its primary and excess D&O insurers concerning an earlier patent infringement case. 


Read More Securities Claim Relates Back to Notice of Circumstances Regarding Patent Infringement Suit

The United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit recently held that general liability insurance policies that provide coverage for injuries caused by acts or omission in providing “professional services” do not trigger a duty to defend or indemnify claims for false billing. 
Read More False Billing Claims Are Not Covered “Professional Services” Under General Liability Policies