The federal district court denied the insurer's motion to dismiss even though the plaintiff was not named in the policy. Viccellio v. Foremost Pro. & Cas. Ins. Co., 2025 U.S Dist. LEXIS 61590 (M.D. La. March 31, 2025).
Plaintiff's residence sustained damage from Hurricane Ida. Plaintiff timely notified the insurer
The insurer's motion for summary judgment to dismiss the insured's complaint challenging the use of Xactimate to determine the repair costs for fire damage was granted. Belotti v. State Farm Fire & Cas. Co., 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 54471 (M.D. Pa. March 25, 2025).
Plaintiffs' home was damaged by fire.
In answering a certified question from the Ninth Circuit, the Alaska Supreme Court determined that an insured could reasonably expect coverage for injuries resulting form exposure to carbon monoxide from an improperly installed home applicance.
Josiah Wheeler rented a cabin owned by Deborah Overly and Terry Summers. While living in the
The Eighth Circuit affirmed the district's granting of summary judgment to the insurer, finding that the exclusion for faulty workmanship was applicable despite the ensuing loss provision. Bob Robinson Commercial Flooring Inc. v. RLI Ins. Co., 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 6369 (8th Cir. March 19, 2025).
The general contractor hired
The homeowner's complaint was improperly dismissed without leave to amend to demonstrate she was a third-party beneficiary of a lender-placed policy on her home. Williams v. Integon Nat'l Ins. Co., 2025 U.S. App LEXIS 6919 (5th Cir. March 25, 2025).
Ellen Williams purchased a home which was mortgaged by Flagstar
Following its order dated February 10, 2025, the Hawaii Supreme Court issued its full opinion, explaining its answers to the reserved questions addressed in the order. In the Matter of the Petition for the Coordination of Maui Fire Cases, Haw Sup. Ct., SCRQ-24-0000602 (March 17, 2025) [Prior post on order here].
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
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
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
