-
October 22, 2026
CHICAGO — An insurer has no duty to defend or indemnify its insureds for an underlying lead paint bodily injury suit because the policies’ lead contamination exclusions clearly apply to relieve the insurer of any duty to defend or indemnify, an Illinois federal judge said in granting the insurer’s motion for judgment on the pleadings.
-
October 22, 2026
NEW YORK — A panel of the First Department New York Supreme Court Appellate Division dismissed an appeal filed by insurers that sought review of a trial court’s refusal to sign an order to show cause in an environmental contamination coverage dispute because the refusal to sign the order is not appealable.
-
October 20, 2026
SEATTLE — A Washington federal judge on Oct. 19 granted a motion to compel appraisal filed by insureds in a water damage coverage dispute, rejecting a homeowners insurer’s argument that appraisal is not appropriate because the parties have not agreed on what needs to be repaired or replaced in the home.
-
October 20, 2026
SHERMAN, Texas — After a Texas federal judge dismissed the bulk of three related oil and gas companies’ claims against a group of insurers participating in the Lloyd’s of London insurance market over the alleged failure and refusal to honor obligations under environmental policies, the underwriters filed an answer to the two surviving causes of action and a series of counterclaims for declaratory judgment, arguing that coverage is unavailable or limited under various policy provisions.
-
October 20, 2026
SAN FRANCISCO — A California federal magistrate judge dismissed with prejudice an insured’s claims against an insurer for breach of contract, bad faith and declaratory relief following the parties’ settlement of a dispute over insurance coverage for underlying suits related to exposure to per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) allegedly contained in aqueous film-forming foam (AFFF) that was manufactured and sold by the insured.
-
October 20, 2026
EL PASO, Texas — A commercial general liability insurer’s amended motion for summary judgment should not be considered because the insurer did not seek leave of a Texas federal court, as required by the court’s local rules, prior to filing the amended motion in a carbon monoxide poisoning coverage suit, the underlying plaintiff maintains in response to the insurer’s amended motion.
-
October 20, 2026
LANSING, Mich. — In response to a motion for partial summary judgment filed in Michigan federal court by insurers in a coverage dispute stemming from lead-contaminated water supplied by an insured city, the underlying plaintiffs say the city’s insurers have a duty to defend the city and pay for the $25 million consent settlement reached by the city and underlying plaintiffs as consequential damages because the insurers failed to show that no coverage is afforded for the underlying class actions filed against the city.
-
October 16, 2026
SHERMAN, Texas — A commercial general liability insurer filed a complaint in Texas federal court, seeking a declaration that it has no duty to defend or indemnify insureds for the release of a toxic chemical from an insured facility because its policy’s pollution exclusion applies as a bar to coverage.
-
October 13, 2026
LOS ANGELES — A California federal judge denied a motion to dismiss or stay a lawsuit pending resolution of a parallel action in Georgia state court after determining that a stay or dismissal is not warranted because it is not clear that all of the issues in the California federal suit related to various insurers’ duty to defend an insured in underlying silica bodily injury suits will be resolved in the Georgia suit.
-
October 13, 2026
ALEXANDRIA, Va. — Primary and umbrella insurers filed suit in a Virginia federal court seeking a declaration that they have no duty to defend or indemnify their insured, a stone product supplier, against underlying silica bodily injury suits because their policies’ exclusions for silica and pollution bar coverage.
-
October 06, 2026
By Scott M. Seaman and Daniel C. Shatz
-
October 08, 2026
LANSING, Mich. — A Michigan federal magistrate judge granted a motion for an order to show cause filed by insurers in a coverage dispute stemming from lead-contaminated water supplied by an insured city after determining that a former city employee who failed to show up at a deposition must appear before the court to show cause as to why he should not be held in contempt of court for failure to appear at the deposition.
-
October 08, 2026
LOS ANGELES — Insureds sued their homeowners insurer for breach of contract, breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing and violation of the California unfair competition law (UCL), alleging that the insurer, in concert with environmental consulting and testing companies, directed an investigation into their Palisades Wildfire claim “that repeatedly narrowed the scope of testing, ignored evidence of contamination in concealed and exterior areas, and proposed piecemeal remediation that could not restore the Property to its pre-loss condition.”
-
October 07, 2026
EL PASO, Texas — A commercial general liability insurer filed an amended motion for summary judgment, correcting its failure to attach the applicable policy to its original motion and reiterating its argument that its policy’s total pollution exclusion bars coverage for an underlying carbon monoxide poisoning suit.
-
October 07, 2026
LOS ANGELES — A California appeals panel affirmed a lower court’s summary judgment ruling in favor of a homeowners insurer on claims for breach of contract, breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, intentional infliction of emotional distress (IIED) and fraud in a lawsuit seeking coverage for property damage following a 2019 rainstorm, holding that the insurer has satisfied its burden of establishing noncoverage warranting summary judgment even if there is a triable question as to the efficient proximate cause of the insureds’ loss.
-
October 07, 2026
CLEVELAND — Two umbrella insurers on Oct. 6 filed a notice of cross-appeal to the Sixth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals following an Ohio federal judge’s determination that the insurers lack standing as no coverage dispute exists based on the finding that the primary insurer has no duty to defend or indemnify the insured in underlying lawsuits stemming from exposure to per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS).
-
October 06, 2026
FORT WORTH, Texas — The Texas Supreme Court agreed to review an appellate panel’s ruling that an insurer has a continued duty to defend its insured against underlying asbestos bodily injury lawsuits because the underlying allegations fall within the policies’ premises-operations coverage and the insurer failed to show that its policies have been exhausted.
-
October 01, 2026
TRENTON, N.J. — A New Jersey federal bankruptcy judge approved the disclosure statement for the reorganization plan of new Chapter 11 debtors Uniroyal Holding Inc. and an affiliate after the debtors mostly resolved objections to the document filed by insurers and the U.S. trustee and filed an amended statement and an amended plan.
-
September 29, 2026
EL PASO, Texas — A commercial general liability insurer’s motion for summary judgment must be denied because the insurer failed to attach the correct insurance policy to its motion and because the insurer’s hostile fire exception to the pollution exclusion may operate to provide coverage for an underlying carbon monoxide poisoning suit filed against the insureds, the underlying plaintiff says in a Sept. 28 response to the insurer’s motion.
-
September 29, 2026
LOS ANGELES — An insurer filed a notice of appeal on Sept. 28 to the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals following a California federal judge’s ruling that a pollution exclusion does not relieve the insurer of its duty to defend its insured against an underlying personal injury suit stemming from a claimant’s exposure to hydrogen sulfide gas.
-
September 29, 2026
LANSING, Mich. — Underlying plaintiffs who filed two class action lawsuits seeking damages caused by lead-contaminated water supplied by a city argue that the city’s insurers have a duty to defend and indemnify the city for a $25 million consent settlement reached in the underlying class action suits because the insurers cannot dispute that the settlement between the city and the underlying plaintiffs was “reasonable and in good faith,” the underlying plaintiffs say in support of a motion for summary judgment filed in Michigan federal court.
-
September 29, 2026
SALEM, Ore. — Review of an Oregon appellate court’s allocation of coverage damages in a contribution coverage dispute between primary and excess insurers over environmental contamination costs incurred by the insureds is not warranted because the appellate court correctly applied the plain language of Oregon’s independent counsel statute and the primary insurer does not dispute the interpretation, a settling insurer says in response to the primary insurer’s petition for review filed in the Oregon Supreme Court.
-
September 28, 2026
WILMINGTON, Del. — A federal bankruptcy court properly enjoined settling insurers’ claims seeking contribution from nonsettling insurers and did not err in permitting holders of temporarily allowed but not-yet-filed talc liability claims to vote on the Chapter 11 plan of liquidation of asbestos talc debtor AIO US Inc. and affiliates, a Delaware federal judge held Sept. 25 in affirming confirmation of the plan over the objections of certain insurers.
-
September 25, 2026
AUSTIN, Texas — Following a settlement between two insurers, a Texas federal judge dismissed without prejudice the general liability insurer’s suit seeking reimbursement from a second insurer for the settlement of an underlying chemical exposure bodily injury suit filed against an insured.
-
September 25, 2026
CLEVELAND — Following an Ohio federal judge’s finding that an occupational disease exclusion relieves a primary insurer of its duty to defend or indemnify its insured in underlying lawsuits stemming from exposure to per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), the insured filed a notice of appeal to the Sixth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals.