Tred R. Eyerly | Insurance Law Hawaii | March 20, 2017 The Federal District Court for the District of Connecticut has issued several decisions of late finding coverage for collapse despite the building not being reduced to rubble. The latest decision in this series is Metsack v. Liberty Mutual Fire Ins. Co., 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS… Continue reading Connecticut Federal District Court Again Finds “Collapse” Provisions Ambiguous
Category: Insurance Coverage
Colorado Court Enforces Statute that Presumes Faulty Workmanship Constitutes an Occurrence
Matthew D. Stockwell | Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP | March 21, 2017 Is damage resulting from faulty workmanship covered under your CGL policy? In the past, insurers have had success in certain jurisdictions arguing that construction defect cases did not constitute a covered “occurrence” because the damage was purportedly not unintended or unexpected. In… Continue reading Colorado Court Enforces Statute that Presumes Faulty Workmanship Constitutes an Occurrence
Techniques to Maximize SDI Coverage and Streamline the Claim Process
Christopher Barbarisi | Construction Executive | February 21, 2017 Design-builders, general contractors and “at risk” construction managers are all vulnerable to the risk of a subcontractor default. Aside from contract-related safeguards, such as increased retention, joint checks and letters of credit, subcontractor surety bonds have been the traditional mechanism for third-party risk transfer. First introduced in the mid-1990s, subcontractor default… Continue reading Techniques to Maximize SDI Coverage and Streamline the Claim Process
“Measurable Increase in Risk” Is Not Specific Enough Reason for Policy Cancellation
Christina Phillips | Property Insurance Coverage Law Blog | March 12, 2017 In August, I wrote a blog post about an insurer who had violated section 143.17a(a) of the Illinois Insurance Code by failing to provide adequate notice of their intention to non-renew a policy. As a result of its failure to timely provide notice… Continue reading “Measurable Increase in Risk” Is Not Specific Enough Reason for Policy Cancellation
Emotional Distress Damages Not Distinct from “Annoyance and Discomfort” Damages in Case Arising from 2007 California Wildfires
Kristen Lee Price and Lawrence S. Zucker II | Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP | February 3, 2017 In Hensley v. San Diego Gas & Elec. Co., (No. D070259, filed 1/31/17), the California Court of Appeal for the Fourth Appellate District held that emotional distress damages are available on claims for trespass and nuisance as part… Continue reading Emotional Distress Damages Not Distinct from “Annoyance and Discomfort” Damages in Case Arising from 2007 California Wildfires