The insurance agent's motion for summary judgment was denied where issues of fact existed regarding his failure to obtain specifically requested coverage. Am. Building Supply Corp. v. Petrocelli Group, Inc., 2012 N.Y. LEXIS 3476 (N.Y. Nov. 19, 2012).
The insured was a tenant of a building from which it sold and furnished building materials to
An insurance agent was not liable for failing to advise the insureds of a cheaper flood policy for their two properties. Green v. Guidry, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 162581 (E.D. La. Nov. 14, 2012).
The insureds owned two residences purchased in 1991 and 2006. They purchased flood insurance through an Allstate agent
The insured sought relief from the ensuing loss provision when the wear and tear exclusion barred coverage. Rapid Park Indus. v. Great N. Ins. Co., 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 23107 (2nd Cir. Nov. 9, 2012).
The insureds leased and operated a parking garage on the lower levels of a building in Manhattan. The
In Pioneer Tower Owners Assn. v. State Farm Fire & Cas. Co., 12 NY3d 302 (2009), the New York Court of Appeals found an "earth movement" exclusion was ambiguous when applied to an excavation. The court now considered whether a similar exclusion, expressly made applicable to "man made" movement of earth, eliminated the
The meaning of "residence premises" in a first party policy was the issue in Dean v. Tower Ins. Co. of New York, 2012 N.Y. LEXIS 3088 (N.Y. Oct. 25, 2012).
The insureds purchased a home. Closing was scheduled to take place on May 20, 2005. The insureds purchased a homeowners' policy from Tower
On a certified question from the Federal District Court, the Supreme Court of Kentucky decided that an anti-assignment provision in a policy is unenforceable. Wehr Constructors v. Paducah Div. Assur. Co. of Am., 2012 Ky. LEXIS 183 (Ky. Oct. 25, 2012).
Before building an addition to its hospital, Murray Calloway County Hospital
The insured had to rely on a policy archivist to establish the terms and conditions of two umbrella policies that were lost. See Canal Ins. Co. v. Montello, Inc., 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 148119 (Oct. 15, 2012). The court excluded the reports and testimony of the expert because he could not satisfy the
By voluntarily injecting a legal issue into the case, the insurer waived the right to keep its communications confidential. Catalina London v. Johnson & Bell, Ltd., 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 147993 (N.D. Ill. Oct. 10, 2012).
The Catalina London sued its former coverage counsel for giving negligent coverage advice in a declaratory judgment
Four homeowners filed suit against Farmers after loss due to fire. Henderson v. Farmers Group, Inc., 2012 WL 5246912 (Cal. Ct App. Oct. 24, 2012). The issue was whether Farmers must provide coverage where late notice was given, but no prejudice was shown.
In August 2009, the Station Fire destroyed 89 homes in Southern California.
The federal district court determined the insureds' arguments relying upon the efficient proximate cause doctrine were misguided and only a portion of the loss from fire and earth movement was covered. Stankova v. Metro. Prop. & Cas Ins Co., 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 150900 (D. Ariz. Oct. 18, 2012).
The insureds' garage was