On January 11, 2022, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit issued its decision in Siplast, Incorporated v. Employers Mutual Casualty Company, 2022 U.S. App. LEXIS 795 (5th Cir. Jan. 11, 2022), finding that...more
In Florida, damage caused by faulty workmanship constitutes “property damage;” however, the cost of repairing or removing defective work does not. Amerisure Mutual Insurance Company v. Auchter Company, 673 F.3d 1294 (11th...more
The proper trigger of coverage in construction defect disputes has been addressed on several occasions by New Jersey courts. Most notably, in Air Master & Cooling, Inc. v. Selective Insurance Company of America, 452 N.J....more
“[T]here is no separate cause of action of institutional bad faith,” the Pennsylvania Superior Court recently concluded, referencing Pennsylvania’s bad-faith statute, 42 Pa.C.S. § 8731, in an action by two homeowners against...more
On December 31, 2019, the First District Illinois Appellate Court issued its decision in Owners Insurance Company v. Precision Painting & Decorating Corporation, clarifying what does and does not constitute “property damage”...more
1/7/2020
/ Appeals ,
Breach of Contract ,
Commercial General Liability Policies ,
Construction Defects ,
Duty to Defend ,
Insurance Litigation ,
Lead Paint ,
Occurrence ,
Property Damage ,
Remand ,
Remediation ,
Reversal ,
Toxic Exposure
In PJR Construction of N.J. v. Valley Forge Insurance Company, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 127973 (D.N.J. July 31, 2019) (PJR Construction), a New Jersey federal court held that the “j.(5)” “Ongoing Operations Exclusion” applied to...more
The standard for an “occurrence” under a commercial general liability (CGL) insurance policy has been addressed on several occasions by Pennsylvania courts when an insured has allegedly performed faulty workmanship on a...more