Robert Frey on Insurance Litigation

Another (need we say it?) Disappointed Additional Insured

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

10/15/2018 / Additional Insured , Bodily Injury , But For Causation , Commercial General Liability Policies , Insurance Claims , Insurance Industry , Insurance Litigation , Proximate Cause

“Additional Insured” counseled to read the policy

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

1/31/2018 / Additional Insured , Commercial General Liability Policies , Construction Industry , Contract Terms , Denial of Insurance Coverage , General Contractors , Insurance Industry , Insurance Litigation

Finally, a happy Additional Insured!

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

12/4/2017 / Additional Insured Endorsements , Bodily Injury , Commercial General Liability Policies , Construction Industry , Denial of Insurance Coverage , Duty to Defend , Insurance Industry , Insurance Litigation , Negligence , Policy Terms

Another Disappointed “Additional Insured.”

We’ve used this headline before. We’ll almost certainly use it again. The case this time, just handed down by the New York Court of Appeals, is Burlington Insurance Co. v. NYC Transit Authority....more

6/16/2017 / Additional Insured , Bodily Injury , Insurance Industry , Insurance Litigation , Transit Authority

Position Accepted By Trial Court, And By Court Of Appeals, Was Insurance Company Bad Faith: Washington Supreme Court

The Washington Supreme Court just handed a defeat to Washington State liability insurers, holding that ProBuilders Specialty Insurance Company had a duty to defend a carbon monoxide poisoning case, notwithstanding a broad...more

5/2/2017 / Bad Faith , Carbon Monoxide Exposure , Insurance Industry , Insurance Litigation , Liability Insurance , Policy Terms , WA Supreme Court

CGL’s “pollution exclusion” applies to “harsh soaps”: Oregon federal court

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

3/29/2017 / Carbon Monoxide Exposure , Commercial General Liability Policies , Denial of Insurance Coverage , Duty to Defend , Insurance Industry , Insurance Litigation , Policy Exclusions , Policy Terms , Pollution Exclusion

“Generic,” “Cut-and-Paste” Reservation of Rights Letter Ineffective

Insureds won a round the other day when the South Carolina Supreme Court held that reservation of rights letters, which it characterized as nothing but “generic statements of potential non-coverage coupled with” large...more

3/6/2017 / Conflicts of Interest , Insurance Litigation , Insureds , Reservation of Rights , SC Supreme Court

Fifth Circuit affirms $34 million verdict against legal malpractice carrier — exclusion, read literally, “renders the coverage...

Readers of Law360 may recall a 2014 story about a Texas jury that rendered a $34 million dollar verdict against OneBeacon Insurance Company. According to Law360, the Jury found that OneBeacon “knowingly failed to attempt, in...more

11/22/2016 / Insurance Industry , Insurance Litigation , Policy Exclusions , Policy Terms

Nevada Supreme Court adopts Cumis independent counsel rule, but refuses to hold that reservation of rights letter always presents...

Answering two certified questions, the Nevada Supreme Court has adopted the independent counsel rule first laid down in San Diego Navy Federal Credit Union v. Cumis Insurance Society, Inc., holding: When a conflict of...more

10/8/2015 / Conflicts of Interest , Cumis Counsel , Insurance Litigation , Reservation of Rights , Right to Independent Counsel

Pennsylvania Supreme Court gets a little help from its friends

The Pennsylvania Supreme Court clarified an important liability insurance issue the other day. Mut. Benefit Ins. Co. v. Politsopoulos, 2015 Pa. LEXIS 1126 (Pa. May 26, 2015) (exclusion for liability for injury to “[a]n...more

6/13/2015 / Amicus Briefs , Employer Liability Issues , Insurance Litigation , Insureds , Liability Insurance , PA Supreme Court , Workplace Injury

Robert Frey

Butler Snow LLP

Popular Topics by This Author

Latest Posts › Insurance Litigation