News & Analysis as of

Insurance Litigation Policy Terms Contamination

Cozen O'Connor

Claims Notes: April 2024

Cozen O'Connor on

Some jurisdictions consider the ISO-form "bodily injury" definition to be ambiguous as to whether emotional distress requires physical harm to be bodily injury. Many insurers have amended bodily injury to expressly require a...more

Cozen O'Connor

Southern District of New York Holds Contamination Exclusion is Ambiguous as Applied to Covid-19 Business Losses

Cozen O'Connor on

The Southern District of New York recently held that a contamination exclusion was ambiguous in the context of Covid-19-related business interruption losses. Accordingly, the court held that the issue was inappropriate to...more

Gould + Ratner LLP

Suburb's Citizens Out of Luck Against Contractor's Insurer for Contaminated Water

Gould + Ratner LLP on

Under established Illinois law, an insurer must defend a legal action filed against its insured unless it is clear from the face of the underlying complaint that the allegations fail to state facts which bring the case...more

Pillsbury - Policyholder Pulse blog

A Recent “Event” in Wisconsin: Appellate Court Rules That a Commonly Used London Market “Occurrence” Definition Is Ambiguous

In recent years, Wisconsin generally has been a pro-policyholder jurisdiction when it comes to long-tail environmental coverage cases. That trend continues with a decision by a Wisconsin appellate court in a case involving...more

Farella Braun + Martel LLP

3 Lessons For Calif. Insureds From Late-Notice Rule Decision

In Pitzer College v. Indian Harbor Insurance Company, the California Supreme Court resolved two previously open questions in insurance law: (1) it concluded that the notice-prejudice rule is a fundamental public policy of...more

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

California Supreme Court Applies Notice-Prejudice Rule to Violation of First-Party Consent Provision as a Predicate to Policy...

Pitzer College v. Indian Harbor Insurance Company, — P.3d –, 2019 WL 4065521 (2019); California Supreme Court, Case No. S239510 (Aug. 29, 2019). On certified questions by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, the California...more

White and Williams LLP

California Supreme Court Holds “Notice-Prejudice” Rule is “Fundamental Public Policy” of California, May Override Choice of Law...

On August 29, 2019, in Pitzer College v. Indian Harbor Insurance Company, 2019 Cal. LEXIS 6240, the California Supreme Court held that, in the insurance context, the common law “notice-prejudice” rule is a “fundamental public...more

7 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 1

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide