{"id":890819,"date":"2016-08-31T09:52:33","date_gmt":"2016-08-31T15:52:33","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/?p=890819"},"modified":"2016-08-31T09:52:33","modified_gmt":"2016-08-31T15:52:33","slug":"two-bites-apple-potential-impact-lexington-ins-co-v-dunnwell-llc-orders-declining-find-duty-defend","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/two-bites-apple-potential-impact-lexington-ins-co-v-dunnwell-llc-orders-declining-find-duty-defend\/","title":{"rendered":"Two Bites at the Apple: The Potential Impact of Lexington Ins. Co. v. DunnWell, LLC on Orders Declining to Find a Duty to Defend"},"content":{"rendered":"

Matthew K. Grashoff | Brouse McDowell<\/a> | August 24, 2016<\/p>\n

Experienced insurance-coverage attorneys and brokers know that in many cases the biggest expense to the insured is not the repayment of whatever damages are alleged by the plaintiff, but rather the insured\u2019s own defense costs. Therefore, one of the main objectives of coverage litigation is often to ensure that the insurer honors its duty to pay for the defense of its insured. Parties frequently file motions for summary judgment on the issue of whether the insurer owes a duty to defend, and the outcome of those motions can be significant to settlement negotiations. What if neither party\u2019s motion for summary judgment is granted, though? A recent decision from Ohio\u2019s Ninth District Court of Appeals may allow the parties another bite at the apple by virtue of an immediate appeal.<\/p>\n

The facts of Lexington Ins. Co. v. DunnWell, LLC<\/em>, 9th Dist. Summit No. 27476, 2016-Ohio-5311, can be distilled down to the following summary. DunnWell and its insurer, Travelers, argued that West Bend Mutual Insurance owed DunnWell a duty to defend and indemnify for an underlying claim because DunnWell was an additional insured on a West Bend CGL policy issued to DunnWell\u2019s subcontractor, ABCO. Naturally, West Bend and ABCO disagreed. (You don\u2019t read many blog posts about parties harmoniously agreeing, do you?) The parties filed cross-motions for summary judgment seeking a declaratory judgment on that issue, but the trial court denied both motions because of genuine issues of material fact. ABCO appealed, and DunnWell and Travelers filed a cross-appeal.<\/p>\n

Before addressing the merits of the appeal, the Ninth District raised the question of whether it had jurisdiction to hear the appeal at all. Under Ohio law, parties can only appeal from a \u201cfinal, appealable order.\u201d In Gen. Acc. Ins. Co. v. Ins. Co. of N.Am.<\/em>, 44 Ohio St.3d 17, 540 N.E.2d 266 (1989), the Ohio Supreme Court provided a two-step process for determining whether an order is final and appealable. First, the order must be final within the requirements of R.C. 2505.02. One of the varied types of final orders under R.C. 2505.02 is an order affecting a \u201csubstantial right made in a special proceeding.\u201d The General Accident Insurance<\/em> Court held that the duty to defend<\/a> is a \u201csubstantial right\u201d and that declaratory-judgment actions are \u201cspecial proceedings\u201d for purposes of R.C. 2505.02. The second step of the analysis is determining whether Civil Rule 54(B) language is required. Rule 54(B) provides that, in cases involving multiple claims or parties, an order that enters final judgment as to fewer than all of the claims or parties is a final appealable order only if the trial court expressly determines that \u201cthere is no just reason for delay\u201d of an appeal of the order.<\/p>\n

Questions of whether an order is final and appealable are often complex; however, one of the widely understood rules in this area is that an order denying summary judgment<\/a> is generally not <\/em>a final appealable order. Despite that general rule, in DunnWell<\/em> the Ninth District reasoned that the trial court\u2019s order denying the cross-motions for summary judgment was a final appealable order. The Ninth District reasoned that \u201c[w]here the denial of a motion for summary judgment in the context of declaratory judgment gives rise \u2026 to the reasonable and logical inference that one party has in fact prevailed, the requirements of finality are satisfied.\u201d DunnWell<\/em> at \u00b6 10. As support for its reasoning, the Ninth District cited Indiana Ins. Co. v. Alloyd Insulation Co<\/em>., 2d Dist. Montgomery No. 18979, 2002-Ohio-3916, where the court held that an order denying the insurer\u2019s motion for summary judgment was a final appealable order because the trial court \u201csuggested that its negative ruling supported a positive inference that [the insurer] had a duty of coverage<\/a>.\u201d Id.<\/em> at \u00b6 4.<\/p>\n

Turning to the facts before it, the Ninth District reasoned that the denial of the cross-motions for summary judgment gave rise to a \u201creasonable, positive inference that West Bend need not defend\u00a0<\/em>DunnWell\u201d for the underlying claim. DunnWell<\/em> at \u00b6 11 (emphasis added). Furthermore, the court noted that denial of the cross-motions left DunnWell with the unattractive choice of either settling the underlying claim in order to avoid paying its own defense costs, or paying for its defense on its own and hoping to eventually prevail on the duty to defend at trial. Crucially, the Ninth District recognized that \u201c[e]ither scenario impacts the substantial rights recognized by the Ohio Supreme Court\u201d regarding the duty to defend<\/a>. Id.<\/em> The Ninth District further reinforced its reasoning by noting that the trial court certified its judgment as a final appealable order pursuant to Rule 54(B).<\/p>\n

Unlike the Second District in Alloyd <\/em>Insulation, the Ninth District did not highlight any particular phrasing or argument in the trial court\u2019s order which led to the \u201creasonable, positive inference\u201d that the order was a de facto<\/em> victory for West Bend and ABCO. Rather, the simple fact that the order left DunnWell with \u201cno legal recourse to compel West Bend to provide a defense\u201d was sufficient. Id.<\/em> Therefore, perhaps the crucial takeaway from DunnWell<\/em> is that it arguably supports the proposition that, in a declaratory-judgment action, an order which does anything other than affirmatively grant the insured summary judgment on the duty to defend is a final appealable order. Think of the possible permutations: under\u00a0General Accident Insurance<\/em>, an order affirmatively granting summary judgment to the insurer is already a final order. Under Alloyd Insulation<\/em>, an order denying summary judgment to the moving party but not granting it to the non-moving party is a final order because it arguably creates an inference of eventual judgment in the non-moving party\u2019s favor. Now, under DunnWell<\/em>, an order denying summary judgment toboth<\/em> the insurer and the insured on cross-motions for summary judgment is a final order because it creates an inference in the insurer\u2019s favor. No matter how you slice it, therefore, any summary-judgment order which does anything other than affirmatively conclude that the insurer owes a duty to defend creates at least an inference that there is not a duty to defend, and is therefore a final order subject to immediate appeal (provided the court complies with Rule 54(B), if necessary). If that interpretation of\u00a0DunnWell <\/em>gains widespread acceptance, the implication on insurance-coverage litigation in Ohio could be significant: insureds may be more willing to aggressively litigate the duty to defend, knowing that even if they lose in the trial court on summary judgment they will have the opportunity to immediately appeal. In turn, the potential for increased litigation expenses could alter the settlement analysis for both insurers and insureds.<\/p>\n

In a perfect world, courts would always grant insureds\u2019 motions for summary judgment on the duty to defend<\/a>. In the imperfect world we live in, however, insureds and their counsel would be well-served to keep DunnWell <\/em>in their back pocket as a helpful precedent to support an immediate appeal of an order denying summary judgment on the duty to defend.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Matthew K. Grashoff | Brouse McDowell | August 24, 2016 Experienced insurance-coverage attorneys and brokers know that in many cases the biggest expense to the insured is not the repayment of whatever damages are alleged by the plaintiff, but rather the insured\u2019s own defense costs. Therefore, one of the main objectives of coverage litigation is… Continue reading Two Bites at the Apple: The Potential Impact of Lexington Ins. Co. v. DunnWell, LLC on Orders Declining to Find a Duty to Defend<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":true,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","enabled":false},"version":2}},"categories":[3],"tags":[57,23],"class_list":["post-890819","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-insurance-claims","tag-duty-to-defend-2","tag-insurance-coverage","entry"],"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"yoast_head":"\nTwo Bites at the Apple: The Potential Impact of Lexington Ins. Co. v. DunnWell, LLC on Orders Declining to Find a Duty to Defend - Advise & Consult, Inc.<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/two-bites-apple-potential-impact-lexington-ins-co-v-dunnwell-llc-orders-declining-find-duty-defend\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Two Bites at the Apple: The Potential Impact of Lexington Ins. Co. v. DunnWell, LLC on Orders Declining to Find a Duty to Defend - Advise & Consult, Inc.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Matthew K. Grashoff | Brouse McDowell | August 24, 2016 Experienced insurance-coverage attorneys and brokers know that in many cases the biggest expense to the insured is not the repayment of whatever damages are alleged by the plaintiff, but rather the insured\u2019s own defense costs. Therefore, one of the main objectives of coverage litigation is… Continue reading Two Bites at the Apple: The Potential Impact of Lexington Ins. Co. v. DunnWell, LLC on Orders Declining to Find a Duty to Defend\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/two-bites-apple-potential-impact-lexington-ins-co-v-dunnwell-llc-orders-declining-find-duty-defend\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Advise & Consult, Inc.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/Advise-Consult-Inc-126949043996790\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2016-08-31T15:52:33+00:00\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@adviseconsult\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@adviseconsult\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"6 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/two-bites-apple-potential-impact-lexington-ins-co-v-dunnwell-llc-orders-declining-find-duty-defend\/#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/two-bites-apple-potential-impact-lexington-ins-co-v-dunnwell-llc-orders-declining-find-duty-defend\/\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/0a11abe008083d5fb19c2b0feefe7bd7\"},\"headline\":\"Two Bites at the Apple: The Potential Impact of Lexington Ins. Co. v. DunnWell, LLC on Orders Declining to Find a Duty to Defend\",\"datePublished\":\"2016-08-31T15:52:33+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/two-bites-apple-potential-impact-lexington-ins-co-v-dunnwell-llc-orders-declining-find-duty-defend\/\"},\"wordCount\":1184,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/#organization\"},\"keywords\":[\"duty to defend\",\"insurance coverage\"],\"articleSection\":[\"Insurance Claims\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/two-bites-apple-potential-impact-lexington-ins-co-v-dunnwell-llc-orders-declining-find-duty-defend\/#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/two-bites-apple-potential-impact-lexington-ins-co-v-dunnwell-llc-orders-declining-find-duty-defend\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/two-bites-apple-potential-impact-lexington-ins-co-v-dunnwell-llc-orders-declining-find-duty-defend\/\",\"name\":\"Two Bites at the Apple: The Potential Impact of Lexington Ins. Co. v. DunnWell, LLC on Orders Declining to Find a Duty to Defend - Advise & Consult, Inc.\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2016-08-31T15:52:33+00:00\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/two-bites-apple-potential-impact-lexington-ins-co-v-dunnwell-llc-orders-declining-find-duty-defend\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"Advise & Consult, Inc.\",\"description\":\"Construction Expert Witnesses\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/#organization\"},\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Advise & Consult\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/11\/AC-Red-Logo.png\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/11\/AC-Red-Logo.png\",\"width\":162,\"height\":75,\"caption\":\"Advise & Consult\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/Advise-Consult-Inc-126949043996790\/\",\"https:\/\/x.com\/adviseconsult\",\"https:\/\/www.linkedin.com\/company-beta\/204526\/\",\"https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/user\/MrConstructionExpert\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/0a11abe008083d5fb19c2b0feefe7bd7\",\"name\":\"admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/b01e71b7acadd7657af782b7ad1a30cc?s=96&d=mm&r=pg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/b01e71b7acadd7657af782b7ad1a30cc?s=96&d=mm&r=pg\",\"caption\":\"admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"http:\/\/www.expertwitnessinconstruction.com\"]}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Two Bites at the Apple: The Potential Impact of Lexington Ins. Co. v. DunnWell, LLC on Orders Declining to Find a Duty to Defend - Advise & Consult, Inc.","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/two-bites-apple-potential-impact-lexington-ins-co-v-dunnwell-llc-orders-declining-find-duty-defend\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Two Bites at the Apple: The Potential Impact of Lexington Ins. Co. v. DunnWell, LLC on Orders Declining to Find a Duty to Defend - Advise & Consult, Inc.","og_description":"Matthew K. Grashoff | Brouse McDowell | August 24, 2016 Experienced insurance-coverage attorneys and brokers know that in many cases the biggest expense to the insured is not the repayment of whatever damages are alleged by the plaintiff, but rather the insured\u2019s own defense costs. Therefore, one of the main objectives of coverage litigation is… Continue reading Two Bites at the Apple: The Potential Impact of Lexington Ins. Co. v. DunnWell, LLC on Orders Declining to Find a Duty to Defend","og_url":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/two-bites-apple-potential-impact-lexington-ins-co-v-dunnwell-llc-orders-declining-find-duty-defend\/","og_site_name":"Advise & Consult, Inc.","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/Advise-Consult-Inc-126949043996790\/","article_published_time":"2016-08-31T15:52:33+00:00","author":"admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@adviseconsult","twitter_site":"@adviseconsult","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"admin","Est. reading time":"6 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/two-bites-apple-potential-impact-lexington-ins-co-v-dunnwell-llc-orders-declining-find-duty-defend\/#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/two-bites-apple-potential-impact-lexington-ins-co-v-dunnwell-llc-orders-declining-find-duty-defend\/"},"author":{"name":"admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/0a11abe008083d5fb19c2b0feefe7bd7"},"headline":"Two Bites at the Apple: The Potential Impact of Lexington Ins. Co. v. DunnWell, LLC on Orders Declining to Find a Duty to Defend","datePublished":"2016-08-31T15:52:33+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/two-bites-apple-potential-impact-lexington-ins-co-v-dunnwell-llc-orders-declining-find-duty-defend\/"},"wordCount":1184,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/#organization"},"keywords":["duty to defend","insurance coverage"],"articleSection":["Insurance Claims"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/two-bites-apple-potential-impact-lexington-ins-co-v-dunnwell-llc-orders-declining-find-duty-defend\/#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/two-bites-apple-potential-impact-lexington-ins-co-v-dunnwell-llc-orders-declining-find-duty-defend\/","url":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/two-bites-apple-potential-impact-lexington-ins-co-v-dunnwell-llc-orders-declining-find-duty-defend\/","name":"Two Bites at the Apple: The Potential Impact of Lexington Ins. Co. v. DunnWell, LLC on Orders Declining to Find a Duty to Defend - Advise & Consult, Inc.","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/#website"},"datePublished":"2016-08-31T15:52:33+00:00","inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/two-bites-apple-potential-impact-lexington-ins-co-v-dunnwell-llc-orders-declining-find-duty-defend\/"]}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/","name":"Advise & Consult, Inc.","description":"Construction Expert Witnesses","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/#organization"},"potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/#organization","name":"Advise & Consult","url":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/11\/AC-Red-Logo.png","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/11\/AC-Red-Logo.png","width":162,"height":75,"caption":"Advise & Consult"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/Advise-Consult-Inc-126949043996790\/","https:\/\/x.com\/adviseconsult","https:\/\/www.linkedin.com\/company-beta\/204526\/","https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/user\/MrConstructionExpert"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/0a11abe008083d5fb19c2b0feefe7bd7","name":"admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/b01e71b7acadd7657af782b7ad1a30cc?s=96&d=mm&r=pg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/b01e71b7acadd7657af782b7ad1a30cc?s=96&d=mm&r=pg","caption":"admin"},"sameAs":["http:\/\/www.expertwitnessinconstruction.com"]}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p2ztG6-3JK3","jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/890819","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=890819"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/890819\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":890820,"href":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/890819\/revisions\/890820"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=890819"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=890819"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=890819"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}