When the insured, Matkin, an architectural firm, was sued by GEWAC, Inc., shopping center owner, for improper drainage in a parking lot designed by Matkin, Everest, the insurer, refused to defend, contending Matkin had not given timely notice under the claims-made policy. Matkin-Hoover Engineering, Inc. v. Everest National Ins. Co., No. 08-CV-0451, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 44057 (W.D.
Duty to Defend
Construction Defects “Expected and Intended” Despite Insured’s Claim of Ignorance
Whether the insured had sufficient knowledge of a construction defect to justify the insurer's denial of coverage was the issue in Far Northwest Dev. Co., LLC v. Cmty. Ass'n of Underwriters of Am., Inc., Case. No. C-05-2134, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 34521 (W.D. Wa. April 22, 2009).
In the underlying case, the Homeowner's Association claimed Mr.
Veternarian Entitled to Defense Under Liability Policy
A veterinarian was entitled to a defense under his Veterinarian's Professional Liability Policy when sued for testimony given in an animal cruelty proceeding. See Centennial Ins. Co. v. Patterson, No. 08-1521, 2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 8402 (1st Cir. April 23, 2009).
The insured was sued with eighty other defendants by Carol Murphy. Ms. Murphy's suit was based…
Business Risk Exclusions Not Applicable For Damage To Building Caused By Installation of Carpet
Exclusions (k) and (m) in comprehensive general liability policies were the focus of a recent decision from the First Circuit. See Essex Ins. Co. v. BloomSouth Flooring Corp., No. 06-2750, 2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 7896 (1st Cir. April 16, 2009) [here].
Boston Financial Data Services (BFDS) hired Suffolk Construction Corporation as general …
Ninth Circuit Certifies Question on Severability of Interests
The Ninth Circuit has certified a question to the California Supreme Court regarding a policy's severability-of-interests clause. See Minkler v. Safeco Ins. Co., No. 07-56689 (9th Cir. April 8, 2009) [here].
Minkler sued Betty Schwartz and her son, David, who allegedly molested Minkler over a period of years while serving as Minkler's…
No Duty to Defend Excavation Damage Under Contractor-Subcontractor Exclusion
In Nautilus Ins. Co. v. 1452 N. Milwaukee Avenue, LLC, No. 07-3147 (7th Cir. April 7, 2009) [here], the Seventh Circuit found there was no duty to defend a land owner causing property damage based on the contractor-subcontractor exclusion.
When excavating its property and demolishing a building thereon, 1452 LLC damaged a neighboring…
Insurer Must Defend Until Jury Determines No Duty to Indemnify
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 …
Texas Court Determines Insured Cannot Rely On Extrinsic Evidence for Duty to Defend
Under Dairy Road Partners v. Island Ins. Co., 92 Hawai`i 398, 414, 992 P.2d 93, 117 (2000), the Hawai`i Supreme Court determined an insured, but not the insurer, can rely on extrinsic evidence to clarify the underlying allegations and demonstrate the possibility of a claim being covered. The Texas Supreme Court recently departed from this reasoning and held neither the…
Hawai`i Court Finds Duty to Defend Allegations of Defamation, Assault and Battery
In Allstate Ins. Co. v. Gadiel, Civ. No. 07-00565, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 90923 (D. Haw. Nov. 7, 2008), the court considered whether Allstate must defend a landlord in an action filed by his tenant.
The tenant alleged assault and battery, defamation, and intentional and negligent infliction of emotional distress. Based on the homeowner's…
Sony Denied Coverage for Defective PlayStation 2s
The Ninth Circuit recently held in Sony v. American Home Assurance that Sony was not entitled to a defense from two of its carriers. Sony was sued because its PlayStation 2s suffered from an "inherent" or "fundamental" design defect that rendered them unable to play DVDs and certain game discs. Sony had a special $10…