Lauren Maldanado | Wiley The U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, applying Illinois law, denied an insured’s motion to stay an insurer’s declaratory judgment action seeking a declaration that it owed no duty to defend. Landmark Am. Ins. Co. v. Reprod. Genetics Inst. Inc., 2025 WL 2855214 (N.D. Ill. Oct. 8, 2025). The… Continue reading Insured’s Motion To Stay Coverage Action Denied Where Duty To Defend Is Based On Allegations Against Insured
Tag: duty to defend
Quick Note: Liability Insurer’s Duty to Defend and Duty to Indemnify
David Adelstein | Florida Construction Legal Updates A liability insurer has two duties: a duty to defend and a duty to indemnify. A recent insurance coverage dispute summarizes these two duties, which are critical for parties to understand and appreciate in the context of insurance coverage claims: An insurance company’s duty to defend is distinct… Continue reading Quick Note: Liability Insurer’s Duty to Defend and Duty to Indemnify
Court Resolves Carriers’ Dispute Over Which Must Defend
Tred R. Eyerly | Insurance Law Hawaii The court agreed with Travelers that Lloyd’s had a duty to defend the underlying personal injury case. Travelers Indem. Co. v. Underwriters at Lloyd’s, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 118445 (S.D. N. Y. June 23, 2025). Jerome Avenue owned a multi-tenant property in the Bronx,… Continue reading Court Resolves Carriers’ Dispute Over Which Must Defend
The Broader The Better – How Broad Is the Duty To Defend?
Adriana Perez and Cary D. Steklof | Hunton Andrews Kurth It is common knowledge in the insurance industry that an insurer’s duty to defend is broad. Recently, a U.S. District Court reminded us just how broad that duty is when it held that a complaint with only two scarce factual allegations triggered an insurer’s duty… Continue reading The Broader The Better – How Broad Is the Duty To Defend?
Federal Court Holds that Demolition Exclusion Does Not Apply and Carrier Has Duty to Defend Additional Insureds
Craig Rokuson | Traub Liberman In the recent case of Travelers Indem. Co. v. Trisura Specialty Ins. Co., 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 101953 (S.D.N.Y. June 7, 2024), the court had occasion to consider the classic additional insured fact pattern of a construction accident. Travelers insured the general contractor and provided a defense to the general contractor… Continue reading Federal Court Holds that Demolition Exclusion Does Not Apply and Carrier Has Duty to Defend Additional Insureds