Newsletter RSS

Mealey's Emerging Insurance Disputes

  • April 01, 2025

    Fact Issues Preclude Summary Judgment, Wisconsin Panel Rules In Reversal

    MADISON, Wis. — A Wisconsin appeals panel reversed a lower court’s ruling that an insurance policy’s “worker-injury” exclusion barred coverage for an underlying negligence lawsuit arising from a construction site injury, finding that fact issues preclude summary judgment in favor of the insurer.

  • April 01, 2025

    Federal Judge Rules For Insurer In Coverage Dispute Arising From Ghost Gun Claims

    NEW YORK — A federal judge in New York granted a commercial general liability insurer’s motion for partial summary judgment and denied a firearms retailer insured’s cross-motion in a coverage dispute arising from ghost gun lawsuits after finding that the underlying actions “clearly allege” that the insured “engaged in deliberate conduct,” further denying the insured’s motion for attorney fees.

  • April 01, 2025

    Delaware Judge: Products Liability Claims Against Mattel Constitute 1 ‘Occurrence’

    WILMINGTON, Del. — A Delaware judge determined that underlying products liability claims brought against Mattel Inc. and Fisher Price Inc. (collectively, Mattel) constituted a single “occurrence” under their tower of commercial general liability insurance policies and should be allocated by the year in which the bodily injury occurred for the policies above the primary tower level, further finding that Great American Assurance Co. has a duty to defend against claims that were allocated to 2013.

  • April 01, 2025

    Washington Panel: Tribe Fails To Show COVID-19 Caused Direct Physical Loss, Damage

    SEATTLE — A Washington appeals court panel on March 31 held that a federally recognized Indian tribe did not state a claim that the COVID-19 virus caused “direct physical loss or damage” to its insured properties, affirming a lower court’s dismissal of the insured’s bad faith complaint arising from the pandemic.

  • March 31, 2025

    Judge Refuses To Toss Property Owner’s Coverage Suit Over Hard Rock Hotel Collapse

    NEW ORLEANS — A federal judge in Louisiana denied builders risk insurers’ motion to dismiss a property owner’s breach of contract lawsuit seeking additional insured coverage for its $89,877,694 in losses arising from the aftermath of the partial collapse of a Hard Rock Hotel project in New Orleans, concluding that the insureds’ claims cannot be dismissed as prescribed.

  • March 28, 2025

    Collateral Estoppel Bars Insured From Relitigating Certain Issues, Panel Affirms

    HARTFORD, Conn.— A Connecticut appeals court affirmed a lower court’s grant of a marine cargo insurer’s motion for summary judgment in an insured’s breach of contract and bad faith lawsuit seeking coverage for the alleged theft and/or misappropriation of 25,250 metric tons of its alumina, finding that the lower court properly determined that the doctrine of collateral estoppel barred the insured from relitigating the issues as to whether the material was stolen and/or misappropriated and whether the material was seized by agents of the Chinese government.

  • March 27, 2025

    U.S. Tax Court Rules For IRS In Yet Another Purported Microcaptive Case

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — In line with the court’s prior rulings in similar cases, a U.S. Tax Court judge ruled against petitioners who challenged adverse Internal Revenue Service determinations regarding a purported microcaptive insurance arrangement, concluding that the arrangement “did not constitute insurance for federal income tax purposes because [a captive insurer] did not distribute the risk of loss among its policyholders, and [the arrangement] was not insurance in the commonly accepted sense.”

  • March 27, 2025

    Illinois High Court Refuses To Disturb Ruling That Exclusion Bars BIPA Suit

    CHICAGO— The Illinois Supreme Court on March 26 denied an insured’s petition for leave to appeal an appeals court’s ruling that insurers have no duty to defend it against an underlying class action lawsuit alleging that it violated the Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act (BIPA) because the policies’ “Recording and Distribution” exclusion barred coverage.

  • March 27, 2025

    In Amended Opinion, Judge Stands By Ruling Insurer Does Not Owe Attorney Fees

    CHICAGO —A federal judge in Illinois filed an amended memorandum in a senior care primary liability insurer’s lawsuit challenging coverage for an underlying $934,232 judgment in a wrongful death and negligence action alleging that an insured violated the Nursing Home Care Act by failing to meet the standard of care at its skilled nursing facility, noting that the amended ruling does not affect the court's prior determination that the insurer has no duty to indemnify its insured for the underlying attorney fee award.

  • March 26, 2025

    U.S. Supreme Court Denies Assignee’s Petition Seeking Review Of Coverage Suit

    BOSTON — The U.S. Supreme Court refused to disturb a First Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals majority’s ruling that affirmed a lower federal court’s judgment in favor of a professional liability insurer in a breach of contract lawsuit brought by an attorney insured’s assignee, denying the assignee’s petition for writ of certiorari in a coverage dispute arising from an underlying legal malpractice claim.

  • March 26, 2025

    Policy’s ‘Changes In Exposure’ Provision Bars Coverage, 3rd Circuit Affirms

    PHILADELPHIA — The Third Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals held that a management liability insurance policy’s “Changes in Exposure” provision unambiguously bars coverage for an underlying breach of fiduciary duty lawsuit, affirming a lower court’s judgment in favor of insurers in a bank’s lawsuit seeking coverage after it became liable for an underlying judgment for the wrongful acts of an acquired company.

  • March 25, 2025

    U.S. High Court Refuses To Review Professional Liability Coverage Dispute

    ATLANTA — The U.S. Supreme Court on March 24 denied a petition for writ of certiorari brought by assignees of an accounting services provider insured, refusing to review the 11th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals’ ruling that affirmed a lower federal court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of a professional liability insurer in their breach of contract lawsuit.

  • March 25, 2025

    No Coverage Owed For Tortious Interference Suit Against Doctor, N.J. Panel Affirms

    TRENTON, N.J. — A New Jersey appeals panel affirmed a lower court’s summary judgment ruling in favor of a business liability insurer in its lawsuit seeking a declaration that it has no duty to defend or indemnify its doctor insured against an underlying lawsuit alleging tortious interference with business, finding that the alleged damages “logically arise” from the insured’s purported tortious interference.

  • March 24, 2025

    Suit Alleged Wrongful Acts By Insured, No Coverage Owed, 9th Circuit Affirms

    LAS VEGAS — The Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals concluded that there is no genuine dispute that an underlying lawsuit alleged willful acts by an insured and, therefore, the exclusionary clause in California Insurance Code Section 533 was triggered, affirming a lower federal court’s judgment in favor of the insurer in an coverage dispute arising from underlying claims that the insured illegally stole a competitor’s clients and agents.

  • March 21, 2025

    Subrogee Insurer’s Expert Can Opine On Origin Of Fire, Judge Finds

    CINCINNATI — A couple lost their effort to toss a complaint alleging that a fire that originated in their yard spread to a neighbor’s home after an Ohio federal judge ruled that an expert retained by the neighbor and her insurance company is admissible to opine on causation.

  • March 21, 2025

    Florida Panel Affirms No Coverage Ruling In Insureds’ Coronavirus Suit

    MIAMI — A Florida appeals court panel held that hotel insureds are not owed business interruption coverage in the absence of “direct physical loss” or “damage” to their properties, affirming a lower court’s ruling in favor of the insurer in a coverage dispute arising from the COVID-19 pandemic.

  • March 20, 2025

    Hawaii High Court Opines On Answers As To Insurer’s Subrogation Rights

    HONOLULU — The Hawaii Supreme Court issue an 80-page opinion expanding on its earlier order that answered three reserved questions on how the subrogation rights of property and casualty insurance carriers bear on a proposed global settlement of claims related to the August 2023 Maui wildfires.

  • March 19, 2025

    Delaware Judge Rules For Insured In D&O Coverage Dispute Over Merger

    WILMINGTON, Del. — A Delaware judge granted an insured’s motion for summary judgment in a directors and officers liability coverage dispute over claims that directors, officers and controlling shareholders breached their fiduciary duties in connection with the 2019 merger of Viacom and CBS Corp., finding that two underlying actions are not “interrelated” and that the policies’ “Prior Notice” and “Pending or Prior Litigation” exclusions do not bar coverage.

  • March 19, 2025

    Insurer Says Pollution Exclusion Bars Coverage For Carbon Monoxide Injury Suits

    DETROIT — No coverage is owed for underlying suits seeking damages for bodily injuries incurred as a result of carbon monoxide poisoning stemming from a malfunctioning pool heater at an insured’s hotel because the excess policy’s pollution exclusion bars coverage for the underlying suits, an excess insurer says in a complaint filed in Michigan federal court.

  • March 19, 2025

    Judge Dismisses Suit Against GEICO After Parties File Joint Notice Of Dismissal

    CHICAGO — The same day the parties filed a joint notice of dismissal, an Illinois federal judge dismissed with prejudice insureds’ lawsuit alleging that auto insurers violated the Illinois Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Business Practices Act by charging “excessive” premiums during the COVID-19 pandemic that failed to account for a dramatic reduction in driving.

  • March 19, 2025

    Judgment Entered In Insurers’ Favor In Coverage Dispute Prompted By Opioid Epidemic

    TAMPA, Fla. — A federal judge in Florida on March 18 entered judgment in favor of insurers in an insured’s lawsuit seeking coverage for underlying actions arising from the opioid epidemic, finding that the insurers have no duty to defend or indemnify because the opioid lawsuits fail to allege damages “for bodily injury” or “because of bodily injury.”

  • March 18, 2025

    N.J. Panel Affirms Ruling In Insurer’s Favor In Suit Over Breach Of Fiduciary Duty

    TRENTON, N.J. —A New Jersey appeals panel held that a comprehensive general liability and directors and officers insurer had no duty to prosecute its insured’s appeal of an underlying breach of fiduciary lawsuit or to cover underlying attorney fees, holding that the insurer’s duty to defend was extinguished because the insured’s actions fell outside the scope of coverage.

  • March 17, 2025

    6th Circuit Asked To Rehear No Coverage Ruling In Professional Liability Dispute

    CINCINNATI — An appellant filed a petition for panel rehearing and rehearing en banc asking the Sixth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals to reconsider its finding that her declaratory judgment and bad faith claims fail because she did not provide a professional liability insurer with “all reasonably obtainable information” about her potential negligence claim against a dentist insured, arguing that the panel opinion misapplied insurance law, failed to hold the insurer accountable “for its shifting justifications” and created “an insurmountable burden for third parties attempting to report claims.”

  • March 17, 2025

    Judge: Breach Of Contract Exclusion Does Not Bar D&O Coverage For Qui Tam Suit

    WILMINGTON, Del. — A Delaware judge ruled in favor of insureds in their lawsuit seeking directors and officers liability coverage for an underlying qui tam action, rejecting the insurers’ argument that the breach of contract exclusion barred coverage.

  • March 17, 2025

    Insurer’s Complaint Is ‘Misuse’ Of Declaratory Judgment Act, Panel Says In Reversal

    NEW ORLEANS — The Fifth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on March 14 reversed a lower federal court’s grant of an insurer’s motion for summary judgment in its declaratory judgment lawsuit arising from an underlying personal injury verdict, concluding that the insurer’s complaint was a “misuse of the Declaratory Judgment Act” because the lower court should have declined to exercise its discretionary jurisdiction.