Jacob C. Cohn, Joseph A. Arnold and Scott B. Galla – October 23, 2012 On October 12, 2012, the Ohio Supreme resolved a long simmering conflict among Ohio’s intermediate appellate courts by answering the following certified question: Are claims of defective construction/ workmanship brought by a property owner claims for “property damage” caused by an… Continue reading Ohio Supreme Court Rules That Claims Of Defective Workmanship Against A Builder Do Not Constitute An Occurrence Under A CGL Policy
Category: Duty to Defend
Based on “Other Insurance” Clause, D&O Insurer has no Duty to Defend Suit Covered by General Liability Policy
Wiley Rein LLP – September 11, 2012 The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York has held that a directors and officers liability (D&O) insurer had no duty to defend an underlying lawsuit—and thus no duty to share in defense costs with a general liability insurer—where the D&O policy at issue contained… Continue reading Based on “Other Insurance” Clause, D&O Insurer has no Duty to Defend Suit Covered by General Liability Policy
Minnesota Arguably Expands Coverage for Additional Insureds in the Construction Context
Laura N. Maupin – September 19, 2012 The Minnesota Court of Appeals issued an unpublished decision in May, 2012 which trends towards an expansion of coverage for additional insureds in the construction context by extending coverage to claims of direct, as well as vicarious liability. In Nor-Son, Inc. v. Western National Mut. Ins. Co., No.… Continue reading Minnesota Arguably Expands Coverage for Additional Insureds in the Construction Context
Illinois court holds no duty to defend water intrusion claim
Brian Margolies – November 11, 2011 In its recent decision Lagestee-Mulder, Inc. v. Consol. Ins. Co., 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 129308 (N.D. Ill. Nov. 8, 2011), the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois addressed what allegations must be made in a construction defect lawsuit in order to trigger coverage under a… Continue reading Illinois court holds no duty to defend water intrusion claim
Utah Supreme Court: extrinsic evidence relevant to applicability of I v. I exclusion – Lexology
Utah Supreme Court: extrinsic evidence relevant to applicability of I v. I exclusion – Lexology.