Tred R. Eyerly | Insurance Law Hawaii | December 21, 2016 The general contractor, an additional insured on the subcontractor’s policy, was not entitled to coverage for construction defect claims that arose after completion of the project. Weitz Co. v. Acuity, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 150433 (S.D. Ohio Oct. 31, 2016). Weitz was the general contractor… Continue reading Additional Insured Not Entitled to Coverage for Post-Completion Defects
Tag: insurance coverage
Oregon Supreme Court Reaffirms Broad Nature of the Duty to Defend, even in the Face of Ambiguous or Unclear Allegations
Kevin Mapes | The Policyholder Report | December 14, 2016 Back in August 2015, I wrote this post about the Oregon Court of Appeals opinion in West Hills Development Co. v. Chartis Claims, Inc., where the court confirmed that Oregon’s broad duty to defend extended to parties claiming rights as “additional insureds.” Last week, the… Continue reading Oregon Supreme Court Reaffirms Broad Nature of the Duty to Defend, even in the Face of Ambiguous or Unclear Allegations
Following Pennsylvania Trend, Federal Court Finds No Coverage For Construction Defects
Tred R. Eyerly | Insurance Law Hawaii | December 5, 2016 Bound by Pennsylvania law, the federal district court found there was no coverage for defects in the installation of a roof. State Farm Fire & Cas. Co. v. Kim’s Asia Constr., 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 138915 (E.D. Pa. Oct. 5, 2016). Kim’s Asia Construction contracted… Continue reading Following Pennsylvania Trend, Federal Court Finds No Coverage For Construction Defects
Year-End Insurance Review: Common Coverage Oversights
C. Andrew Gibson | Idaho Business Review | November 25, 2016 Carrying adequate insurance is a critical risk management step for developers, builders and designers working on construction projects. Yet the important intricacies of coverage are too often overlooked at the time of contracting as the parties deal quickly to get a project moving forward.… Continue reading Year-End Insurance Review: Common Coverage Oversights
Florida Supreme Court Decides that Concurrent Causes Equal Coverage
Heidi Hudson Raschke | PropertyCasualtyFocus | December 2, 2016 It’s said that “defeat is an orphan,” but insurable losses often have multiple, concurrent causes. In some cases, one or more of those causes might be outside the scope of coverage, either by omission or exclusion. In Sebo v. American Home Assurance Company, No. SC14-897 (Fla. Dec.… Continue reading Florida Supreme Court Decides that Concurrent Causes Equal Coverage