The court granted the insurer's motion for summary judgment when the insured failed to raise a genuine issue of material fact as to whether he insurer acted in bad faith. Dillen v. QBE Ins. Corp. 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 24742 (S.D. Texas Feb. 11, 2025).
The insureds were away from
The federal district court granted the insurer's motion to dismiss because the insureds' claim for damages under the Standard Flood Insurance Policy was submitted too late. Caruso v. First Protective Ins. Co., 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 23288 (M.D. Fla. Feb. 10, 2025).
The insureds' property sustained flood damage during Hurricane
The federal district court agreed that the insurer properly rejected the insured's claim for flood damage after suit was not timely filed. 4922 Mgmt. LLC v. Selective Ins. Co. of the Southeast, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 21173 (M.D. Fla. Feb. 6, 2025).
The insured's property suffered damage during Hurricane Ian.
The Texas Supreme Court determined that language in the following form excess policy did not obligate it to defend the insured. Ohio Cas. Ins. Co. v Patterson UTI Energy, Inc., 2025 Tex. LEXIS 1123 (Tex. Sup. Ct. Dec. 20, 2024).
Patterson provided oil-and-gas equipment and services. Patterson was insured by
We presented at the ABA’s Insurance Coverage Litigation Committee’s annual seminar in Tucson yesterday. We delved into “The Ins and Outs of Outside Adjusters.” Thanks to my co-presenters, Karin S. Aldama, Esq., from Gallagher Kennedy and Rina Carmel, Esq., from Anderson, McPharlin & Conners LLP.
On the heals of a decision from a federal district court that smoke damaged was a direct physical loss, the California Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court's grant of summary judgment to the insurer regarding the insureds' claim for loss due to smoke damage. Gharibian v. Wawanesa General Ins. Co., 2025
Headed to Tucson this week to attend the ABA's annual Insurance Coverage Litigation Committee seminar. Always great presentations and discussions on a variety of coverage topics. Along with my co-panelists, Rina Carmel and Karin S. Aldama, we will lead a discussion on The Ins and Outs of Outside Adjusters. Looking forward to it
The federal district court found that smoke and soot contamination rendered the property unfit for normal use, meeting the standard for "direct physical loss" under the policy language for recovery of business income. Bottega, LLC, et al. v. National Surety Corporation-Chicago, Il, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 5666 (N.D. Cal. Jan. 10, 2025).
Bottega
The insured's claim for collapse of a building was denied after failing to file suit within the two-year limitation set forth in the policy. 94 Broad Street, LLC v. The Hartford Financial Services Group, Inc., 2025 Conn. Super. LEXIS 112 (Conn. Super. Ct. Jan. 24, 2025).
The insured had a
The court denied the insurer's Motion for Summary Judgment seeking to dismiss the insured's breach of contract claim. The court also denied the insurer's Daubert motion to exclude the insured's expert witness. Ram Krishana Inc. v. Mt. Hawley Ins Co., 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 18912 (S.D N.Y Feb. 3, 2025).
