July 2010

   Should an insurer be allowed to pursue a federal action for declaratory judgment on its duty to defend where the insured has failed to cooperate in numerous underlying state actions against it?  The Fifth Circuit decided the district court erred in staying the declaratory judgment action and allowed the federal case to proceed simultaneously with the state cases.  See

  Two interesting issues were presented in Jeffrey M. Brown, Assoc., Inc. v. Zurich Am. Ins. Co., 2010 N.J. Super. LEXIS 108 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. June 23, 2010).  First, what was the scope of coverage provided by an additional insured endorsement which provided the coverage was "excess over any other insurance?"  Second

   The insurer defended the underlying construction defect case under a reservation of rights, but moved for summary judgment in the coverage action on its duty to indemnify.  Mid-Continent Caus. Co. v. Frank Casserino Constr., Inc., 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 59363 (M.D. Fla. June 16, 2010). 

   The general contractor subcontracted with the insured to perform building

   In a coverage dispute between two insurers, the court considered the impact of an endorsement excluding coverage for any loss that first manifested before the term of the policy.  See Pa. Gen. Ins. Co. v. Am. Safety Indemn. Co., 2010 Cal. App. LEXIS 981 (Cal. Ct. App. June 28, 2010).

   Whitacre Construction, a

   The Ninth Circuit covered a lot of ground in reviewing the Benefits Review Board's ("BRB") determination that the claimant was entitled to benefits in Hawaii Stevedores, Inc. v. Ogawa, 2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 12767(9th Cir. June 22, 2010).

   Ogawa was a storeroom maintenance clerk at the employer's marine terminal from 1977 to November

   As we noted in a prior post, the Hawaii Intermediate Court of Appeals recently decided that construction defects do not constitute an occurrence under a CGL policy.  Citing the same Colorado Court of Appeals case that the Hawaii ICA found persuasive, the 10th Circuit certified a similar issue to the Colorado Supreme Court in Greystone

   Defense obligations under a policy containing umbrella and excess coverage were before the court in Legacy Vulcan Corp. v. The Superior Court, 184 Cal. App. 4th 285 (Cal. Ct. App. 2010).

   Vulcan manufactured and sold perchloroethylene.  The City of Modesto sued Vulcan, alleging that use of perchloroethylene by the dry cleaning industry

   Marriott entered a franchise agreement with Columbia Hotels.  See Marriott Int'l, Inc. v. Amoco Ins. Co., 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 53253 (W.D. Mo. May 28, 2010).  In the agreement, Columbia agreed to "indemnify, defend and save harmless Marriott against all losses, damages, claims, . . . arising out of . . . the Franchised