Newsletter RSS

Mealey's Insurance

  • July 28, 2025

    Duty To Indemnify Owed For Settlement, Insured Says In Newly Filed Complaint

    DALLAS — An insurer owes a duty to indemnify an insured for the settlement of an underlying suit filed against the insured because there is no evidence that the damages in the underlying suit were caused by pollutants, the insured contends in a July 25 complaint filed in Texas federal court.

  • July 25, 2025

    Final Judgment Entered In Asbestos Coverage Dispute Per Parties’ Stipulation

    FORT WORTH, Texas — A Texas federal judge entered final judgment in an asbestos coverage dispute after the insured and three of its excess insurers stipulated to dismiss all remaining claims that were left unresolved by the court in the parties’ motions for summary judgment.

  • July 25, 2025

    Insureds Sufficiently Support Bad Faith Claim In Water Damage Suit, Judge Says

    PHILADELPHIA — A bad faith claim alleged by insureds in a water damage coverage dispute can proceed because the insureds’ amended complaint alleges that the homeowners insurer’s denial of coverage was not reasonable based on the lack of evidence that the water damage was caused by a continuous leak, an excluded cause of loss, a Pennsylvania federal judge said July 24 in denying the insurer’s motion to dismiss the bad faith claim.

  • July 22, 2025

    No Coverage Owed To Insured, Judgment Properly Entered For Insurer, Panel Says

    SEATTLE — A district court properly entered summary judgment in favor of an insurer on breach of contract and extracontractual claims because no coverage is owed to the insured for an underlying property damage and environmental cleanup suit as the underlying suit did not arise out of an occurrence as required by the policies at issue, the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals said July 21.

  • July 22, 2025

    Excess Insurer Says Pollution Exclusion Bars Coverage For Underlying Asbestos Suits

    FORT WORTH, Texas — An excess insurer filed suit in Texas federal court against its insured and two of the insured’s other excess insurers, seeking a declaration of its coverage obligations to the insured for underlying asbestos bodily injury suits filed against the insured and claiming that its policies’ pollution exclusion bars coverage for the underlying suits.

  • July 22, 2025

    Insurer Has Duty To Defend, Indemnify Insured For Chemical Exposure Suit

    INDIANAPOLIS — An insurer owes a duty to defend and indemnify its insured for an underlying class action suit filed in Taiwan by factory workers who claim that they suffered bodily injuries after being exposed to organic solvents at a factory partially owned by the insured because the insurer failed to show that the known loss doctrine bars coverage for the suit, the Indiana Court of Appeals said.

  • July 22, 2025

    Issues Of Fact Preclude Judgment In Water, Mold Damage Suit, Magistrate Judge Says

    CHICAGO — An Illinois federal magistrate judge partially denied a motion for summary judgment filed by insureds in a water and mold damage coverage dispute after determining that “too many issues of material fact” exist regarding whether the homeowners insurer breached its contract or acted unreasonably in handling the insureds’ claim.

  • July 21, 2025

    Florida Panel Affirms Judgment For Now-Insolvent Insurer In Breach Of Contract Row

    WEST PALM BEACH, Fla. — Without providing explanation, a Florida appellate court affirmed a lower court’s grant of summary judgment for a now-insolvent insurer in homeowners’ breach of contract suit against the insurer alleging that it failed to adequately cover the costs of water damage to the insureds’ home.

  • July 18, 2025

    Avon Entities, Asbestos Claimants Committee Advocate For Bankruptcy Plan Approval

    WILMINGTON, Del. — A Delaware federal bankruptcy court should confirm the “almost entirely consensual” Chapter 11 liquidation plan of the U.S. divisions of cosmetics giant Avon over the objections of some insurers because the plan “distributes Estate assets to creditors in a fair, efficient, and expeditious manner,” the debtors say in a July 17 brief in support of confirmation.

  • July 16, 2025

    Insurer Says No Further Coverage Owed For Underlying Silica Bodily Injury Suits

    NEW YORK — In a complaint filed in New York federal court, an insurer says it owes no further coverage to an insured for underlying silica bodily injury lawsuits filed against the insured because coverage is afforded under only one of its policies and that coverage was exhausted when the insurer funded a settlement for one of the underlying suits.

  • July 15, 2025

    Insured Settles With 1 Insurer In Asbestos Coverage Suit; Claims Dismissed

    PITTSBURGH — A Pennsylvania federal judge granted a joint motion to dismiss all claims against an insurer in a dispute over coverage for underlying asbestos bodily injury claims after the insured and the insurer notified the judge that a confidential settlement was reached between the two parties.

  • July 15, 2025

    Pollution Exclusion Bars Coverage For Contamination Suit, Insurer Contends

    PITTSBURGH — No coverage is owed for an environmental contamination suit filed against an insured because the pollution exclusions in the insured’s commercial general liability policies bar coverage, an insurer says in a complaint filed in Pennsylvania federal court.

  • July 15, 2025

    Summary Judgment Motions Granted For Insurer, Shipbuilder In Asbestos Coverage Row

    NEW ORLEANS — A Louisiana federal judge granted separate motions filed by a former shipbuilder and by the purported insurer for the shipbuilder’s prior executive officers seeking summary judgment in a mesothelioma patient’s asbestos liability suit against numerous parties, including a now-insolvent insurer, finding that the unopposed motions and the record establish “that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact.”

  • July 14, 2025

    Mine Workers’ Claims Against Insurer Cannot Proceed, Federal Magistrate Judge Says

    GREAT FALLS, Mont. — Claims alleged against an insurer of the state of Montana by mine workers who were exposed to asbestos cannot proceed because the mine workers are judicially estopped from bringing the claims against the insurer because they admitted in the underlying suit against the state that the insurer had a reasonable basis to deny coverage, a Montana federal magistrate judge said in granting the insurer’s motion to dismiss.

  • July 11, 2025

    Panel: Radioactive Matter Exclusion Bars Coverage For Radiation Exposure Claims

    CHICAGO — A Seventh Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel affirmed a district court’s ruling that no coverage is owed by insurers pursuant to policies’ radioactive materialsexclusion for an underlying suit seeking damages for bodily injuries caused by exposure to electromagnetic (EMF) radiation from the insured’s electric transformers because the exclusion bars all claims related to any form of radiation.

  • July 11, 2025

    Insureds Are Permitted To Pursue Claims Related To Remediation Costs, Panel Says

    TRENTON, N.J. — A settlement agreement reached between insureds and former tenants of the insureds who operated a dry-cleaning business did not resolve any claims the insureds have against their own insurers, a panel of the New Jersey Superior Court Appellate  Division said in reversing a trial court ruling in a dispute over coverage for environmental remediation costs.

  • July 09, 2025

    Bad Faith, Unfair Insurance Practices Claims Dismissed In Remediation Coverage Suit

    LAS CRUCES, N.M. — A New Mexico federal judge granted an insurer’s motion to dismiss claims alleging bad faith and violations of New Mexico Unfair Insurance Practices Act (NMUIPA) after determining that the insureds, which are seeking coverage for environmental contamination remediation costs related to the release of a waste byproduct from a gas pipeline, failed to show that the insurer’s reservation of its right to deny coverage was arbitrary or unreasonable.

  • July 08, 2025

    Surplus Lines Insurer, Insured File Notice Of Settlement In Water Damage Suit

    ATLANTA — A surplus lines insurer and its insured filed a notice of settlement in Georgia federal court, agreeing to settle the insured’s breach of contract and bad faith suit stemming from the insured’s claim for coverage for a number of insured apartment units damaged as a result of frozen water pipes that burst.

  • July 08, 2025

    Insured Permitted To Amend Complaint In Environmental Remediation Coverage Suit

    BALTIMORE — A Maryland federal judge denied a motion for reconsideration filed by an insured in a dispute over coverage for environmental remediation work but granted the insured leave to amend its complaint to include the contract related to the insured’s work after determining that the insured met its burden of showing that the contract may raise the possibility that coverage is afforded under the policies at issue.

  • July 08, 2025

    Misrepresentation, Fraud Claims Will Not Proceed In Mold, Water Damage Suit

    SALT LAKE CITY — A Utah federal judge determined that misrepresentation and fraud claims alleged against a homeowners insurer and an engineer hired by the insurer cannot proceed because no party or entity actually relied on any alleged misrepresentation in the engineer’s report regarding the cause of water and mold damage sustained at the insureds’ home.

  • July 07, 2025

    Insured’s Late Notice Of Asbestos Suit Was Prejudicial To Excess Insurers

    NEWARK, N.J. — A New Jersey federal judge granted summary judgment in favor of two excess insurers after determining that the insurers met their burden of showing that they were prejudiced by the insured’s late notice of an underlying asbestos suit filed against the insured.

  • July 02, 2025

    Fungus Coverage Provision Does Not Provide Coverage For Water Loss Claim

    MILWAUKEE — A commercial property insurer did not breach its contract and act in bad faith in refusing to pay an insured’s claim for water damage under the policy’s additional coverage provision for fungus, rot and bacteria because the water damage was caused by repeated seepage or leakage of water, an excluded cause of loss, a Wisconsin federal magistrate judge said July 1 in granting the insurer’s motion to dismiss.

  • July 02, 2025

    Judge Finds Insurer Not Required To Indemnify Builder For Arbitration Award

    HOUSTON — A federal judge in Texas granted a commercial general liability insurer’s motion for summary judgment in a case brought against it by a builder that alleged that the insurer was required to indemnify it after homeowners were awarded more than $213,000 for damages caused by construction defects in the home the builder built, finding that the appraisal process discharged the insurer’s obligations under the policy.

  • July 01, 2025

    Insurer Says It Owed No Duty To Defend Water Contamination Suits

    LOS ANGELES — An insurer maintains in opposition to an insured’s motion for judgment on the pleadings that it owed no duty to defend the insured against two water contamination complaints filed by the Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board because the complaints only sought to impose penalties against the insured and did not seek damages as required by the policy.

  • July 01, 2025

    Insured Urges Texas Federal Court To Allow Promissory Estoppel Claim To Proceed

    AUSTIN, Texas — A Texas federal court should not adopt a magistrate judge’s recommendation to dismiss an insured’s counterclaim for promissory estoppel in a dispute over coverage for defective pool shells because the magistrate judge misapplied the legal standard governing promissory estoppel claims, the insured says in its objections to the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation.