Tred R. Eyerly | Insurance Law Hawaii | September 4, 2019 The plaintiff insurer’s motion for partial summary judgment seeking an order that defendant insurer was obligated to defend a non-party as an additional insured was granted. Am Empire Surplus Lines Ins. Co. v. Burlington Ins. Co., 2019 N. Y. Misc. LEXIS 4145 (N.… Continue reading Insurer Must Defend Additional Insured Though Its Insured is a Non-Party
Category: Insurance Coverage
Is All Damage Caused By Sewage or Water Infiltration Excluded By My Homeowners Insurance Policy?
Paul LaSalle | Property Insurance Coverage Law Blog | November 13, 2019 Homeowners insurance policies ordinarily exclude losses caused by water or sewage which backs up through sewers or drains. Does it follow that all water or sewage that infiltrates a home through sewers or drains constitutes excluded back up? In Windows v. Eerie Insurance Exchange,1 insureds… Continue reading Is All Damage Caused By Sewage or Water Infiltration Excluded By My Homeowners Insurance Policy?
Shoring of Ceiling Does Not Constitute Collapse Under Policy’s Definition
Tred R. Eyerly | Insurance Law Hawaii | August 28, 2019 Despite the need to shore up the ceiling, the building was not in a state of collapse under the language of the policy. Ravinia Vouge Cleaners v. Travelers Cas. Ins. Co. of Am., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 123594 (N.D. Ill. July 24, 2019).… Continue reading Shoring of Ceiling Does Not Constitute Collapse Under Policy’s Definition
Bad Faith Damages Against Surplus Line Insurers Might Not Be Capped in Illinois
Paul Walker-Bright | Neal, Gerber & Eisenberg | November 15, 2019 I recently had occasion to read through the Illinois Surplus Line Law in detail when I noticed something interesting: surplus lines insurance companies may not be subject to the cap on bad faith damages usually applied to claims against insurers in Illinois. Allow me… Continue reading Bad Faith Damages Against Surplus Line Insurers Might Not Be Capped in Illinois
California Supreme Court Holds “Notice-Prejudice” Rule is “Fundamental Public Policy” of California, May Override Choice of Law Provisions in Policies
Anthony L. Miscioscia and Timothy A. Carroll | White and Williams | August 30, 2019 On August 29, 2019, in Pitzer College v. Indian Harbor Insurance Company, 2019 Cal. LEXIS 6240, the California Supreme Court held that, in the insurance context, the common law “notice-prejudice” rule is a “fundamental public policy” of the State of California… Continue reading California Supreme Court Holds “Notice-Prejudice” Rule is “Fundamental Public Policy” of California, May Override Choice of Law Provisions in Policies