A commentary on insurance coverage issues in Hawaii and beyond
The court determined there was no coverage for water intrusion based upon a comprehensive Exterior Insulation and Finish Systems (EIFS) Exclusion. Nat'l Am. Ins. Co. v. Gerlicher Co., LLC, 2011 Okla. Civ. App. LEXIS 79 (Okla. Ct. App. Aug. 29, 2011).
Gerlicher purchased a commercial building constructed by general contractor Pinion Construction…
In yet another recent construction defect case, the Illinois Court of Appeal found for coverage. See Milwaukee Mut. Ins. Co. v. J.P. Larsen, Inc., 2011 Ill. App. Ct. LEXIS 872 (Ill. Ct. App. Aug. 15, 2011).
Weather-Tite, Inc. hired Larson as a subcontractor to apply sealant to windows installed by Weather-Tite in a condominium…
The California Court of Appeals considered the reach of a pollution exclusion in a first party property policy. See The Villa Los Alamos Homeowners Assoc. v. State Farm Gen. Ins. Co., 2011 Cal. App. LEXIS 1079 (Cal. Ct. App. Aug. 17, 2011).
A prior case from the California Supreme Court was instructive. In MacKinnon …
The insurer argued it had no duty to defend the assignee of a policy because it was not a named insured. While the trial court agreed, the Appellate Court of Illinois reversed. Illinois Tool Works, Inc. v. Commerce and Indus. Ins. Co., 2011 Ill. App. LEXIS 881 (Ill. Ct. App. Aug. 16, 2011).…
In a January decision, the South Carolina Supreme Court found no coverage under a CGL policy for construction defects. On rehearing and after considering numerous amici briefs, the court withdrew its initial opinion and determined there was coverage for progressive property damage caused by faulty workmanship. Crossmann Communities of North Carolina, Inc. v. Harleysville …
The federal district court was bound by a prior decision from the Kentucky Supreme Court in deciding construction defects did not qualify as an "occurrence" under a CGL policy. See State Auto Ins. Co. v. Thomas Landscaping & Construction, Inc., 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 88176 (E.D. Ohio Aug. 9, 2011).
After Thomas…
The cost of removing and replacing cracked flanges to prevent future leakage was not covered as an ensuing loss under a builder's risk policy in RK Mechanical, Inc. v. Travelers Prop. Casualty Co. of Am., 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 83958 (D. Colo. Aug. 1, 2011).
The insured, RK Mechanical Inc., was a…
The underlying plaintiff's allegations contended the contractor was in breach of contract for construction defects caused in building her home. Accordingly, the court found no coverage. See Nat'l Builders and Contractors Ins. Co. v. Slocum, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 81694 (S.D. Miss. July 26, 2011).
Slocum Construction LLC sold a home it…
Interesting read from the Insurance Technology website [here]. The article states what appears to be the obvious. In the aftermath of Hurricane Irene, the insurer may be less than accommodating when claims are reported and adjusted. The article reports that not every claim becomes a nightmare. But, "[w]ith more than a million homeowner claims and…
As noted in today's Christian Science Monitor [here], the insurance implications for losses caused by Hurricane Irene will be tempered by at least two factors. First, much of the damage was caused by flood, a peril not covered under a home owner's or commercial property policy. Only if the insured has additional…
