LOS ANGELES — In a July 28 complaint, an insurer seeks a declaration from a California federal court of its obligations toward a $1.59 million underlying construction defects arbitration (Kinsale Insurance Company v. Josh D. Moorvitch, et al., No. 20-6750, C.D. Calif.).
JASPER, Ala. — A federal judge in Alabama on July 29 dismissed as unripe an insurer's declaratory judgment claim on its duty to indemnify a negligent construction action but allowed the insurer to proceed on a similar claim regarding its duty to defend (Country Mutual Insurance Company v. James Gardner, et al., No. 20-23, N.D. Ala., 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 134330).
LAS VEGAS — A subcontractor's insurer breached its contract and acted in bad faith by refusing to defend and indemnify allegations over defective home installation of eaves and soffits that resulted in a $17.8 million judgment, a homebuilder says in a July 24 complaint filed in a Nevada federal court (PN II, Inc. v. National Fire & Marine Insurance Company, No. 20-1383, D. Nev.).
MIAMI — A commercial general liability insurer has no duty to defend or indemnify an insured against a lawsuit seeking damages resulting from allegedly faulty installation of a roofing sealant, a Florida federal magistrate judge found July 27, recommending that summary judgment be entered in favor of the insurer (Atlantic Casualty Insurance Company v. Legacy Roofing of Flahead General Contractors & Restoration, LLC, et al., No. 19-22043, S.D. Fla., 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 133700).
CHARLESTON, S.C. — After previously finding no duty to defend or indemnify a $9 million construction defects settlement, a federal judge in South Carolina on July 27 ruled that an insured and a condominium association failed to show that they suffered consequential damages from an excess insurer's alleged breach of its duties of good faith and fair dealing (ContraVest Inc., et al. v. Mt. Hawley Insurance Company, No. 15-304, D. S.C., 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 132495).
BURLINGTON, Vt. — A Vermont federal magistrate judge on July 24 dismissed a subrogated insurer's negligence, breach of contract and breach of implied warranties suit against a property management company over water leaks in a condominium building (Country Mutual Insurance Company v. Altisource Online Auction, Inc., No. 19-74, D. Vt., 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 131766).
OAKLAND, Calif. — A general contractor failed to allege breach of contract and bad faith counterclaims against its insurer in their coverage dispute over a condominium unit remodel project, a California federal magistrate judge held July 20 (Colony Insurance Company v. Glenn E. Newcomer Construction, No. 20-480, N.D. Calif., 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 127448).
HARTFORD, Conn. — A contractor's insurer claims in a July 21 complaint filed in Connecticut federal court that two insurers of a subcontractor owe coverage for an underlying construction defect suit filed against the contractor (The Travelers Indemnity Co. v. Liberty Mutual Insurance Co., et al., No. 20-1020, D. Conn.).
BUFFALO, N.Y. — A federal judge in New York on July 17 held that a professional liability insurer has a duty to defend against an underlying lawsuit arising from the insured's alleged "faulty" design of an anaerobic digester system, finding that the exception to the policy's express warranty exclusion applies to allow coverage (Those Certain Underwriters At Lloyd's, London, v. DVO, Inc., et al., No. 19-00252, W.D. N.Y., 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 127390).
PHILADELPHIA — Allegations of faulty workmanship against a home improvement contractor are not covered under a commercial general liability insurance policy, a federal judge in Pennsylvania ruled July 20, granting judgment on the pleadings to the insurer (Atain Insurance Company v. Xcapes, et al., No. 19-05346, E.D. Pa., 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 127707).
BALTIMORE — Homeowners in an underlying construction defects action are not indispensable parties to an insurer’s declaratory judgment action, a federal judge in Maryland ruled July 17, denying insureds’ motion to dismiss for failure to join (Clarendon National Insurance Company v. Dan Ryan Builders, Inc., et al., No. 19-3527, D. Md., 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 126516).
SAN FRANCISCO — In a coverage dispute involving six insurers over the defense of a potential additional insured in a construction defects case arising out of a Hampton Inn hotel project, a California federal judge on July 15 refused to dismiss one of the insurer’s declaratory relief cross-claim against another insurer (ACE American Insurance Company v. Old Republic General Insurance Corporation, et al., No. 20-482, N.D. Calif., 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 124791).
PHILADELPHIA — A commercial general liability insurer has a duty to defend two construction defect cases, the Third Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruled July 16, finding that malfunctions of windows and moisture barriers are “occurrences” (Nautilus Insurance Company v. 200 Christian Street Partners LLC, et al., Nos. 19-1507 and 19-1506, 3rd Cir., 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 22118).
GALVESTON, Texas — Insurers breached their contract and acted in bad faith by refusing to pay a settlement of alleged construction defects in repair work for a multifamily condominium complex, a waterproofing contractor says in a July 14 complaint filed in Texas federal court (Millsap Waterproofing, Inc. v. United States Fire Insurance Company, et al., No. 20-240, S.D. Texas).
PHILADELPHIA — “Contractual liability” and “your work” exclusions preclude coverage for damages from faulty insulation work in a condominium project, an insurer and an umbrella insurer allege in a July 13 complaint filed in a Pennsylvania federal court (Main Street America Assurance Company, et al. v. United Insulation Services, Inc., et al., No. 20-03430, E.D. Pa.).
LUBBOCK, Texas — There is no coverage for homeowners’ underlying arbitration demand of $250,000 in damages from alleged construction defects, a commercial general liability insurer says in a July 13 complaint filed in a Texas federal court, citing various exclusions such as ones for “professional liability” and “fungi or bacteria” (National Builders Insurance Company v. Architects, Developers & Contractors, Inc., et al., No. 20-00162, N.D. Texas).
CHICAGO — The Seventh Circuit U.S. Court of Appeal on June 30 affirmed a district court’s ruling that no payment is owed under surety bonds to a subcontractor that performed work on a federal government project because the subcontractor did not provide notice of nonpayment of services within 90 days of its last day of work as required under the Miller Act (A&C Construction & Installation Co. WLL v. Zurich American Insurance Co., et al., No. 19-3325, 7th Cir., 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 20347).
DENVER — “Your work” exclusions and an “earth movement” exclusion preclude coverage for any part of a $791,766.92 arbitration award or a $502,606.64 confessed judgment connected to allegations of construction defects in a single family home, a commercial general liability insurer says in a July 7 complaint filed in a Colorado federal court (Mesa Underwriters Specialty Insurance Company v. Kersting Construction Group, Inc., et al., No. 20-01984, D. Colo.).
NEW ORLEANS — There is no coverage for a doctor’s $1 million arbitration demand concerning allegations of defective construction in his home, a commercial general liability insurer says in a July 2 complaint filed in a Louisiana federal court (Mesa Underwriters Specialty Insurance Company v. Boudreaux Builders, Inc., et al., No. 20-1884, E.D. La.).
PHILADELPHIA — A Pennsylvania federal judge on July 7 dismissed a lawsuit against an insurer over coverage for homeowners’ personal injuries resulting from mold contamination because the homeowners lack standing to sue and the insured’s declaratory judgment claim regarding the insurer’s duty to indemnify is unripe (Joseph Oliver Construction, LLC, et al. v. Utica First Insurance Company, No. 19-4352, E.D. Pa., 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 118595).