Following California law, the federal district court adopted horizontal allocation to settle a dispute among carriers for an insured sued for selling asbestos products. New England Fire Ins. Corp. v. Ferguson Enterprises, Inc., Civil No. 3:12cv948 (D. Conn. April 8, 2014) [ruling here

   The insured was a California-based corporation that sold

   The insurer's attempt to dismiss the insured's multi-count complaint for failure to provide full coverage for flood damage failed. Ragusa Corp. v. Standard Fire Ins. Co., 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 40812 (D. Conn. March 27, 2014).

   The insureds' house suffered significant damage due to flood associated with Hurricane Irene. The insureds submitted

   The New Jersey Supreme Court considered the appropriate allocation for costs of the cleanup of contaminated property when one of the two insurers became insolvent. Farmers Mut. Fire Ins. Co v. N.J. Prop. Liab. Ins. Guar. Ass'n, 2013 N.J. LEXIS 902 (N.J. Sept. 24, 2013).

   Newark Insurance Company issued a homeowner's policy

   The Missouri Court of Appeal determined that the all sums approach would be utilized for property damage occurring through several policy periods. Doe Run Res. Corp. v. Certain Underwriters at Lloyd's London, 2013 Mo. App. LEXIS 468 (Mo. Ct. App. April 16, 2013).

    The insured, Doe Run, was a mining, milling

   In a long awaited decision regarding California's liability for damages caused by the Stringfellow Acid Pits case, the California Supreme Court adopted the "all sums" method of allocating coverage among multiple insurers for long-tail claims. Further, the court concluded that stacking of policy limits was consistent with the CGL policy language. See State v.

   The Utah Supreme Court determined the "other insurance" provisions of successive policies were inapplicable and instead adopted the time-on-the-risk method of allocation for defense costs in The Ohio Casualty Ins. Co. v. Unigard Ins. Co., 2012 Utah LEXIS 1 (Utah Jan. 06, 2012).

   Ohio Casualty insured Cloud Nine from June 10, 2001 to June 10

   The Court considered how to allocate defense and indemnity responsibilities among various insurers in The Travelers Indem. Co. v. W.M. Barr & Co., No. 2:08-CV-02649 (D. Tenn. Nov. 28, 2011).

   W. M. Barr manufactured a variety of solvents, removers, and other related products. Barr was sued in various lawsuits alleging injury resulting

   Although the excess carrier was given inadequate notice of the underlying arbitration, the trial court determined it shared responsibility with the primary carrier for the arbitration award. Finding disputed issues of fact, the Washington Court of Appeals reversed in Am. States Ins. Co. v. Century Surety Co., 2011 Wash. App. LEXIS 2488 (Wash.