2010

   A psychologist was entitled to coverage after the court determined the professional liability policy's Knowing Wrongful Act Exclusion was ambiguous.  See Am. Home Assurance Co. v. Pope, No. 08-2848, 2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 516 (8th Cir. Jan. 11, 2010).

   Sparing you of the tortuous procedural history (running on three tracks: arbitration; up and

   Is an insurer exposed to bad faith if it relies upon its own mistake to withhold payment under the policy?  The court answered yes in Lundy Enterprises, LLC v. Wausau Underwriters Ins. Co., No. 06-3509, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 121295 (E.D. La. Dec. 30, 2009).

   Wausau provided commercial property coverage for the insured's

   Coverage for the auto policy holder's daughter was at stake in Morrison v. Secura Ins., No. 286936, 2009 Mich. App. LEXIS 2694 (Mich. Ct. App. Dec. 29, 2009).

   In April 2006, the insured's daughter struck plaintiffs' motorcycle with her Chevrolet Cavalier, causing serious injury to the plaintiffs.  The auto policy listed the mother

   Although the excess insurer sought a narrow reading of "additional insured," the policy's failure to define the coverage allowed a broad reading of the term in Kerrigan v. RM Associates, Inc., No. 100316/08, 2009 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9517 (N.Y. App. Civ. Dec. 29, 2009).

   The decedent was killed in a construction accident. 

   The insured's home was extensively damaged by wind and rain resulting from Hurricane Katrina.   See Belonga v. Auto Club Family Ins. Co., No. 09-476, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 118643 (E.D. La. Dec. 21, 2009).  When purchased in 2003, the home was appraised at $114,000.  An adjuster addressing the insured's flood claim reported, however, the home had

   The applicability of a policy's land subsidence exclusion was considered by the court in City of Carlsbad v. Insurance Co. of the State of Pennsylvania, No. D053843, 2009 Cal. App. LEXIS 2025 (Cal. Ct. App. Dec. 17, 2009).

   The insured City of Carlsbad negligently maintained and repaired a fire hydrant and water line

   The Texas Supreme Court recently held that an insurer may have a duty to indemnify even if the duty to defend never arises.  See D.R. Horton-Texas, Ltd. v. Markel Int'l Ins. Co, Ltd., No. 06-1018, 2009 Tex. LEXIS 1042 (Tex. Dec. 11, 2009).

   The homeowners purchased their house from D.R. Horton.  After moving