The court determined that the project owner's general partner was not an additional insured entitled to a defense and indemnity against claims for construction defects. St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. Co. v,. Cypress Fairway Condo. Ass'n, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 94012 (M.D. Fla. July 20, 2015).

   Construction of the Cypress Fairway

   In a dispute between two insurers, the district court determined that the contractor was not an additional insured under the subcontractor's policy. Navigators Spec. Ins. Co. v. St. Paul Surplus Lines Ins. Co., 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 79338 (N. D. Cal. June 17, 2015). 

   McDevitt & McDevitt Construction Corporation was the general

   The California Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court's denial of the insured's request for independent counsel. Centex Homes v. St. Paul Fire and Marine Ins. Co., 237 Cal. App. 4th 23 (Cal. Ct. App. 2015).

   Centex, a developer of single family residences, was sued by homeowners for alleged construction defects. Centex

   The court found the contractor did not have coverage as an additional insured under the subcontractor's policy. Walton Constr. v. First Fin. Ins. Co., 2015 US. Dist. LEXIS 30710 (E.D. La. March 12, 2015). 

    John Maestri was injured while working on a construction project for the Jefferson Parish School Board. Maestri

   A series of communications requiring the subcontractor to provide additional insured  coverage for the contractor were sufficient to fit within the policy's provision identifying additional insureds. KB Home Tucson, Inc. v. The Charter Oak Fire Ins. Co., 2014 Ariz. App. LEXIS 228 (Ariz. Ct. App. Nov. 25, 2014).

    KB, the general