R. Thomas Dunn and Sheya Rivard | Pierce Atwood Additional Insured’s Action Against Insurer Dismissed for Lack of Personal Jurisdiction The takeaway of this article is for you to consider updating your clients’ insurance requirements to require a specific additional insured endorsement. This endorsement requires a lower-tier contractor/policyholder to identify your client’s company by name in the… Continue reading Should You Require a Specific Endorsement Naming Your Client as an Additional Insured?
Tag: Additional Insured
Construction Litigation Roundup: “Builder’s Risk Indeed”
Daniel Lund III | Phelps Dunbar A contractor for a hotel in Seattle was tasked with constructing the hotel utilizing premanufactured modular hotel rooms. The modular unit portion of the project was the subject of a $15.8 million subcontract between the general contractor and the manufacturer. The manufacturer was also responsible to the GC for… Continue reading Construction Litigation Roundup: “Builder’s Risk Indeed”
Policy Reformed to Add New Building Owner as Additional Insured
Tred R. Eyerly | Insurance Law Hawaii The lower court correctly reformed the policy to replace the prior owner with the new owner as an additional insured under the policy. Wesco Ins. Co. v. Fulmont Mut. Ins. Co., 2023 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2650 (N. Y. App. Div. May 11, 2023). Beyond… Continue reading Policy Reformed to Add New Building Owner as Additional Insured
“Incidental” Versus “Direct” Third Party Beneficiaries Under Insurance Policies in Which a Party is Not an Additional Insured
Garret Murai | California Construction Law Blog As they say, when it rains, it pours. Indemnity and insurance are the “Big Two” when it comes to risk avoidance on construction projects. The next case, LaBarbera v. Security National Security Company, 86 Cal.App.5th 1329 (2022), involves both. It’s an interesting case, which I think could have gone… Continue reading “Incidental” Versus “Direct” Third Party Beneficiaries Under Insurance Policies in Which a Party is Not an Additional Insured
Defense Owed to Insured Subcontractor, but not to Additional Insured
Tred R. Eyerly | Insurance Law Hawaii Affirming the district court, the Eleventh Circuit agreed that the insured subcontractor was entitled to a defense against claims of faulty workmanship, but no defense was owed to the additional insured subcontractor. Cincinnati Spec. Underwriters Ins. Co. v. KNS Group, LLC, 2022 U.S. App. LEXIS 27949 (11th… Continue reading Defense Owed to Insured Subcontractor, but not to Additional Insured