One commentator has called the scope of Additional Insured coverage “[o]ne of the oldest and most confounding debates in the insurance world.” Another chapter was written the other day in Pioneer Cent. Sch. Dist. v. Preferred...more
An Illinois General Contractor learned a hard lesson the other day; the case is Vivify Constr., LLC v. Nautilus Ins. Co., 2017 IL App (1st) 170192.
The General Contractor, Vivify Construction, subcontracted part of the job...more
We have noted, again and again, examples of disappointed Additional Insureds. Today we report that at least one Additional Insured has left the Courthouse smiling. It was, however, to paraphrase Wellington, a near-run...more
We’ve chronicled some of the ways in which an “Additional Insured” can be disappointed. The most recent is from Pennsylvania, where the United States District Court Judge agreed with the Magistrate that the Additional...more
The latest round in the fight over the CGL’s “pollution exclusion” — which well-respected commentator Craig F. Stanovich has called “one of the least understood and most litigated portions” of the CGL — went to the insurance...more
The retail giant Costco joined the ranks of disappointed “Additional Insureds” the other day in a California Court of Appeals case, Costco Wholesale Corp. v. Tokio Marine and Nichido Fire Ins. Co. Ltd., which left Costco and...more
No contract clause is more common than the one that says, in effect, “B promises to carry commercial general liability insurance, and to make A an ‘Additional Insured’ under B’s policy.” And perhaps no contract clause...more