It's an unpublished decision and not certified for publication. Nevertheless, the analysis of the interplay between the anti-concurrent causation clause and the efficient proximate cause doctrine described in Rouland v. Pacific Specialty Ins. Co., G040299, 2009 Cal. App. Unpub. LEXIS 2589 (Cal. Ct. App. March 30, 2009) warrants attention.
The insured's home suffered damage
How does the court assign the burden of proof when a property policy does not clearly state whether it is an all risks or named perils policy? The court faced such a policy in Royale Green Condominium Assoc., Inc. v. Aspen Specialty Ins. Co., No. 07-21404, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 24349 (S.D. Fla. March 24, 2009).
After Hurricane Wilma
Does failure to give notice "as soon as practicable," but within the policy period, allow the insurer to deny coverage under a claims-made policy? In Prodigy Communications Corp. v. Agric. Excess & Surplus Ins. Co., No. 06-0598 (Tex. March 27, 2009) [here], the Texas Supreme Court answered, "no."
The insured held a claims-made
Our last post [here] summarized a case in which the Ninth Circuit found the anti-concurrent provision to be ambiguous. See Alexander Mfg., Inc. v. Illinois Union Ins. Co., No. 07-35812 (9th Cir. March 25, 2009) [here]. Today we review a case in which the anti-assignment provision was strictly construed
Historically, the Ninth Circuit has not favored anti-assignment clauses. See, e.g., Northern Ins. Co. of New York v. Allied Mut. Ins. Co., 955 F.2d 1353 (9th Cir. 1992)(benefits of policy transfer by operation of law to successor corporation despite anti-assignment provision). Applying Oregon law, the Ninth Circuit recently continued its pattern, determining
Continuing its recent trend in post-Katrina cases to find for the policy-holder (see Dickerson v. Lexington Ins. Co., 2008 WL 5295389 (5th Cir. Dec. 22, 2008)[ reviewed hereGrilletta v. Lexington Ins. Co. 2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 276 (5th Cir. Jan. 8, 2009)[reviewed here]), the Fifth Circuit reversed an award of summary judgment in
The insured moved for summary judgment on bad faith because of the insurer's alleged delayed and incomplete payments after Hurricane Katrina destroyed property. See Plaquemines Parish School Bd v. Indus. Risk Insurers, No. 06-7213, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 20004 (E.D. La. March 11, 2009).
School buildings operated by the insured
We have previously discussed here, here, here, and here the validity of assigning liability policies to corporate successors without securing the insurer's consent as required by the policy. Coverage issues arise when the successor seeks benefits under the policy assigned to it by the predecessor. Although the validity of the assignment was not at issue
In Emhart Indus., Inc. v. Century Indemn. Co., No. 07-2806 (1st Cir. March 13, 2009)[here], the First Circuit found a duty to defend a CERCLA case until the point at which it was determined there was no duty to indemnify.
From 1944 to 1968, Metro-Atlantic operated a chemical plant at the
Revisiting the longstanding Stringfellow Acid Pits coverage litigation, the California Supreme Court relied on the doctrine of concurrent proximate cause as applied to the pollution exclusion to determine the insurer must indemnify for covered and uncovered claims. See State of California v. Allstate Ins. Co., S149988 (Cal. March 9, 2009)[here].