Reinsurance Law Blog

Reinsurance Law Blog

Tag Archives: exclusion

Summary judgment to homeowner insurance company reversed on burst pipe claim — 10th Circuit, Utah

Posted in Contractual Liability, Insurance Bad Faith
In Wheeler v. Allstate Insurance Company, Wheeler insured his cabin with Allstate.  A friend stopped by the cabin in the spring and found a pipe had burst and there was water in the basement.  There was extensive damage.  It was determined that the pipe burst two months before discovery and was likely caused by a… Continue Reading

Habitation or vacancy clause in homeowner’s policy conditions section is an exclusion — Arkansas

Posted in Contractual Liability
In Farm Bureau v. Davenport, 2017 Ark. App. 207, Davenport had 2 houses, one in Michigan and one in Arkansas.  While at the Michigan house, the Arkansas house was broken into and set on fire.  Farm Bureau denied the claim because the house was unoccupied when the house was destroyed. One of the policy conditions,… Continue Reading

Criminal Acts exclusion did not apply to negligent conduct even if the conduct leads to a criminal conviction — Missouri

Posted in Contractual Liability, Insurance Bad Faith
In Pitt v. Leonberger, the Missouri Court of Appeals ruled that the criminal conduct exclusion did not apply. Leonberger, a school bus driver, struck and killed Pitts’ son.  The insurer, Missouri United School Insurance Council (MUSIC), accepted liability and even hired an attorney to represent Leonberger when a criminal charge of negligent homicide was filed against… Continue Reading

Construction defect is not an “occurrence” or “accident” that triggers covered “property damage” within the meaning of a CGL policy – 7th Circuit, Illinois

Posted in Contractual Liability, Duty to Defend
In  Allied Prop. & Cas. Ins. Co. v. Metro N. Condo. Ass’n., Allied’s policyholder insured improperly installed windows on Metro’s property. Metro sued the insured for breach of the implied warranty of habitability. Metro and the insured entered into a settlement agreement assigning Metro the right to the insured’s insurance proceeds. Allied sought a declaratory… Continue Reading

Indoor Air Pollution exclusion ok, not violative of state law — Oklahoma

Posted in Contractual Liability
In Siloam Springs Hotel v. Century Surety, 2017 OK 14, the issue was whether an exclusion for injury from indoor air was enforceable.  Apparently, some guests were injured from carbon monoxide at the hotel.  The insurance company did not cover the resulting claims based on the Indoor Air Exclusion, which stated the policy does not apply… Continue Reading

No coverage for contaminated water claim at mobile home park, 8th Circuit, Missouri

Posted in Duty to Defend
In Williams v. Employers Mutual Casualty Co., the issue was insurance coverage for claims for contaminated drinking water at a mobile home park. There was no coverage for the claims because the insurance policies’ pollution exclusions excluded coverage for “‘[b]odily injury’ or ‘property damage’ arising out of the actual, alleged or threatened discharge, dispersal, seepage,… Continue Reading

Explosion Excluded from Coverage by Pollution Endorsement – 8th Circuit, North Dakota

Posted in Duty to Defend
Hiland Partners GP Holdings, L.L.C. v. Nat. Union Fire Ins. Co. of Pittsburgh, Pa. arose from an insurance coverage dispute over a processing facility condensate explosion. The insurer claimed the explosion was excluded per the policy’s pollutants endorsement. The endorsement defined pollutants as “any solid, liquid, gaseous, or thermal irritant or contaminant” and excluded coverage… Continue Reading

Insured vs Insured exclusion applies to preclude coverage under D&O policy — 8th Circuit Minnesota

Posted in Contractual Liability, Duty to Defend
In Jerry’s Enterprises, Inc. v. U.S. Specialty Insurance Co, Sullivan, a former director of the company, and her daughters (also shareholders) sued Jerry’s regarding the valuation of their stock.  Jerry’s settled, and then sued US Specialty for its defense costs and for sums paid under the settlement agreement.  The trial court said no coverage and… Continue Reading

Injury occurring during rodeo event subject to athletic participation exclusion — MD Fla.

Posted in Duty to Defend
In Volusia County Cattlemen’s Association v. Western World Insurance Company; Case No: 6:15-cv-1239 (MD Fla), Desiree Cicero was participating in a cash grab event at the Cattlemen’s rodeo.  The event involved grabbing cash off of bulls running around in the arena.  Cicero was hurt and sued the Association.  The Association sought a defense and coverage… Continue Reading

Owned vehicle exclusion, underinsured motorist coverage, 8th Circuit, Missouri law

Posted in Contractual Liability, Vehicle
Walker v. Progressive Direct Ins. Co. Steve Walker died in a motorcycle accident. After his widow settled against the tortfeasor for policy limits of $25,000, she sought underinsured motorist coverage UIM under two Progressive Auto Policies insuring the Walkers’ six other cars. The trial court granted Progressive’s motion for summary judgment, concluding that the policies’… Continue Reading

TCPA exclusion applies to non-TCPA claims, such as conversion — ED Missouri, applying Illinois law

Posted in Duty to Defend
In Regent Insurance Co. v. Integrated Pain Management, 4:14-CV-1759 RLW, 2016 WL 5357408 (E.D. Mo. Sept. 23, 2016) the policyholder was sued for sending unsolicited faxes in violation of the TCPA — Telephone Consumer Protection Act. In addition to the statutory damages, the complaint said that by sending the faxes, the policyholder converted the plaintiffs’… Continue Reading

Employee dishonesty, non-cumulation provision, policy holder gets multiple years of coverage Oklahoma

Posted in Contractual Liability, New Case
In First United Methodist Church of Stillwater, Inc. v. Philadelphia Indemnity Insur. Co., 2016 OK CIV APP 59, First United’s finance manager embezzled nearly $200,000 between 2009 and 2012. First United gave notice to Philadelphia of the thefts in January 2013 that it discovered in December 2012. Philadelphia conducted an investigation and ultimately paid First United… Continue Reading

Muslide is not an explosion and untimely removal o.k’d (10th Cir.) Colorado law

Posted in Contractual Liability, New Case
In Paros Properties v. Colorado Casualty, the Owner’s property was demolished by a mudslide.  The owner claimed the Building was destroyed not by the mudslide itself, but by a resulting explosion, as there was a loud noise accompanying the collapse. The District court granted the insurer, Colorado Casualty, summary judgment. The Tenth Circuit affirmed, even… Continue Reading

Wyoming Oil & Gas Insurance Policies Exempt from Anti-Indemnity Statute; 10th Circuit, Wyoming

Posted in Contractual Liability, Duty to Defend, Insurance Bad Faith, New Case
In Lexington Ins. Co. v. Precision Drilling Co., L.L.P., the insurer sued the insured after an accident on the insured’s oil rig. The insurance policy was purchased by the oil rig management company. The insurer claimed the policy violated the Wyoming Anti-Indemnity Statute because the policy was purchased by a third party and the statute… Continue Reading

Insurers Must Defend Telemarketing Suits — despite claims of intentional conduct — Second Circuit, NY

Posted in Contractual Liability, Duty to Defend, New Case
In National Fire Insurance Company v. E. Mishan & Sons, Inc., Emson was sued in two class action lawsuits that claimed Emson worked with two other companies to to deceptively trap customers into recurring credit card charges.  The underlying lawsuits asserted that Emson acted as a purveyor of data, facilitating “data passes” and transferring private… Continue Reading

Underground water exclusion in homeowners policy unambiguous; 8th Circuit (Arkansas law)

Posted in Insurance Bad Faith, New Case
In Bull v. Nationwide Mutual Fire Insurance Company, Bull sued Nationwide when it failed to pay for damages caused by water that leaked from a buried pipe located beneath the garage-floor slab of Bull’s home. Summary judgment to Nationwide was affirmed on appeal.  Bull’s policy contained an exclusion for loss caused by “water … below… Continue Reading

No E & O coverage for suit where named insured was not named defendant (specific entity exclusion) (10th Cir. Colorado)

Posted in Contractual Liability, New Case
In P&S LLC v. National Union Fire Insurance Company, P&S sued Private Escapes, a luxury-travel company, and its CEO, Keith.  P&S had signed up with Private Escapes after being told by Keith its deal would be grandfathered in after a planned merger between Private Escapes and Ultimate Resorts.  When the resulting company, Ultimate Escapes, refused… Continue Reading

Anti-concurrent causation — roof collapse 10th Circuit, Colorado

Posted in Contractual Liability, Insurance Bad Faith, New Case
In Gallegos v. Safeco Ins. Co. of America, Gallegos made a claim against Safeco when his roof collapsed due to snow and ice.  Safeco denied the claim, saying the collapse was caused, at least in part, by improper maintenance and construction. Summary judgment to Safeco was affirmed.  It was undisputed that improper maintenance contributed to… Continue Reading

Fellow employee and intentional acts exclusions not applicable, auto policy; Tenth Circuit applying Wyoming law

Posted in Contractual Liability, Duty to Defend, New Case
In Peerless Indemnity v. Swanner, the passengers were being driven home by a fellow employee in an employer owned shuttle when there was a wreck, and the passengers were injured.  The driver was allegedly intoxicated.  The passengers got workers compensation The passengers also filed suit against the driver in Wyoming state court, alleging the driver… Continue Reading

Named peril policy — Ensuing Loss Coverage Disputed — Missouri law

Posted in Contractual Liability, Insurance Bad Faith, New Case
In Bolinger vs. Clarks Fork Mutual Insurance Company,  Clarks Fork Insurance did not pay for the collapse of the Bolingers’ turkey barns after a winter storm.  The insurer said the policy didn’t cover the claim.  Summary judgment to the insureds was reversed. The Bolingers claimed that since the policy did not exclude collapse, it must be… Continue Reading
Lexblog