April 2009

    In Nautilus Ins. Co. v. 1452 N. Milwaukee Avenue, LLC, No. 07-3147 (7th Cir. April 7, 2009) [here], the Seventh Circuit found there was no duty to defend a land owner causing property damage based on the contractor-subcontractor exclusion.

    When excavating its property and demolishing a building thereon, 1452 LLC damaged a neighboring

    My wife and I were in Houston again last week.  Over the weekend, we drove to Galveston, continuing a chain of visits from both before and after Hurricane Ike.  [See prior posts here and here].  The Gulf Coast was in the Houston news last week because of former President George H.W. Bush's Saturday visit to Gilchrist on the Bolivar

    It's now late April.  Posting on a decision rendered in March, early March at that, breaches a blogger's protocol.  And In Re: Katrina Canal Breaches Consolidated Litigation; Pertains to: Road Home, Louisiana State, No. 05-4182, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 30406 (E.D. La. March 5, 2009), received press when issued.  The case allowed individual claims

    I can't resist reading a decision regarding a dispute over hurricane coverage for property owned by an Alaska Native Corporation.  See Arctic Slope Regional Corp. v. Affiliated FM Ins. Co., No. 08-30050, 2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 6900 (5th Cir. April 2, 2009).  The Arctic Slope Regional Corporation, one of the few lucrative Native Corporations formed under the

    The Hawai`i Intermediate Court of Appeals' (ICA) decision in Liberty Mut. Ins. Co. v. Sentinel Ins. Co., Ltd., No. 27429, 2009 Haw. App. LEXIS 134 (Haw. Ct. App. March 31, 2009) is unpublished and the facts are detailed, but it's a Hawaii insurance-related decision.  So we submit the following.

    Ms. Labrador, the insured, sustained

    It's an unpublished decision and not certified for publication.  Nevertheless, the analysis of the interplay between the anti-concurrent causation clause and the efficient proximate cause doctrine described in Rouland v. Pacific Specialty Ins. Co., G040299, 2009 Cal. App. Unpub. LEXIS 2589 (Cal. Ct. App. March 30, 2009) warrants attention. 

    The insured's home suffered damage

    How does the court assign the burden of proof when a property policy does not clearly state whether it is an all risks or named perils policy?  The court faced such a policy in Royale Green Condominium Assoc., Inc. v. Aspen Specialty Ins. Co., No. 07-21404, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 24349 (S.D. Fla. March 24, 2009).

   After Hurricane Wilma

    Does failure to give notice "as soon as practicable," but within the policy period, allow the insurer to deny coverage under a claims-made policy?  In Prodigy Communications Corp. v. Agric. Excess & Surplus Ins. Co., No. 06-0598 (Tex. March 27, 2009) [here], the Texas Supreme Court answered, "no."

    The insured held a claims-made