When the Hawaii State legislature ended its session in May, we reported here on the insurance-related bills that passed. The Governor had until July 12, 2011, to sign pending legislation.
In looking back, we see that the Governor signed all of the insurance-related bills passed in recent legislative session. This includes HB 924
Although the insurer paid for some of the mold damage at the insured's home, the Fifth Circuit eventually determined the homeowner's policy did not cover such damage. Rooters v. State Farm Lloyds, 2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 12306 (5th Cir. June 15, 2011).
The policy excluded loss caused by hail to personal property
The Illinois Court of Appeals determined the insurer must defend allegations of property damage arising from faulty workmanship. Milwaukee Mut. Ins. Co. v. J.P. Larsen, Inc., 2011 Ill. App. Unpub. LEXIS 1443 (Ill. Ct. App. June, 20, 2011).
Larsen was a subcontractor for Weather-Tite in a condominium building. Weather-Tite installed windows on the
The homeowners hired the insured to raise the structure of their home twenty-four inches above the flood zone. Lafayette Ins. Co. v. Peerboom, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 58985 (S.D. Miss. June 2, 2011). When the insured's crew returned from lunch one day, they found the house had fallen from hydraulic jacks being used
The insured homeowners were unsuccessful in arguing around the policy's exclusions when seeking coverage for damage caused by Chinese drywall. Ross v. C. Adams. Constr. & Design, L.L.C., 2011 La. App. LEXIS 769 (La. Ct. App. June 14, 2011).
Before the insureds purchased and moved into their home, it was renovated. After moving
The insurer's duty to defend the insured against claims arising from contamination of the commercial rice supply by mixing it with genetically modified ("GM") rice was at stake in Riceland Foods, Inc. v. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co., 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 61381 (E.D. Ark. June 8, 2011).
Riceland processed and marketed rice and other
At issue was whether damage caused by a crane landing on a building during a tropical storm was covered as an ensuing loss. See Certain Interested Underwriters at Lloyd's London v. Chabad Lubavitch of Greater Ft. Lauderdale, Inc., 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 8403 (Fla. Ct. App. June 8, 2011).
The insured had two policies
The case involved another chapter in the long-standing coverage litigation in which the insured, Kaiser Cement and Gypsum Corporation, sought to enforce indemnity obligations against its insurers for thousands of suits filed because of asbestos exposure. See Kaiser Cement and Gypsum Corp. v. Ins. Co. of the State of Pennsylvania, 2011 Cal. App.
The insurer sought to avoid coverage for claims against its insured, a supplier of Chinese drywall. The court ruled, however that the exclusions relied upon by the insurer did not bar coverage. See Auto-Owners Ins. Co. v. Am. Building Materials, Inc., 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 52837 (M.D. Fla. May 17, 2011).
The
The Louisiana Supreme Court considered a certified question from the Fifth Circuit regarding the applicability of anti-assignment provisions in homeowners' policies. In Re: Katrina Canal Breaches Litigation, 2011 La. Lexis 1118 (La. May 10, 2011).
The Fifth Circuit asked,
Does an anti-assignment clause in a homeowner's insurance policy, which by its plain terms