HONOLULU — The plaintiff in a dispute over a purported reinsurance policy asked a Hawaii federal court to remand the case “in light of the double presumptions against removal jurisdiction and fraudulent joinder.”
NEW ORLEANS — An insurer proceeding as subrogee of its contractor insured seeks a new trial or, in the alternative, reconsideration of a Louisiana federal judge’s ruling dismissing its suit against a subcontractor’s insurer to recover damages it paid stemming from water damage caused by the subcontractor’s negligence in performing work on a home’s roof, arguing that because it filed an amended complaint after the subcontractor’s insurer filed its motion to dismiss, which the subcontractor’s insurer answered, the motion to dismiss was moot when it was granted.
BOSTON — A district court properly found that an insurer is entitled to reimbursement for defense costs paid on behalf of its insureds and has no duty to contribute to the settlement of a bodily injury suit stemming from an employee’s contact with raw sewage because the policy’s fungi and bacteria exclusion clearly precludes coverage, the insurer says in an appellee brief filed in the First Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals.
TAMPA, Fla. — While a federal judge in Florida correctly ruled that several leaks discovered in a fire suppression system over a period of time are considered one “occurrence” under a plain reading of builders risk policies issued by two insurers, the judge erred in finding that two deductibles applied — one for the original policy period and one for an extension of the policy period, a property owner and its general contractor argue in a May 24 motion for partial reconsideration.
RICHMOND, Va. — An insured filed a petition in the Fourth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals seeking en banc review of the panel’s opinion earlier in May that vacated and remanded a lower federal court’s ruling that a “bump-up” exclusion does not unambiguously preclude directors and officers liability insurance coverage for the $90 million settlement of two underlying lawsuits arising from a 2015 merger, challenging the panel’s holding that the lower court “adopted an unduly narrow reading” of the exclusion.
DENVER — A federal judge in Colorado has denied an insurance association’s motion to appear as amicus curiae in support of an insurer that seeks judgment as a matter of law (JMOL) or a new trial after a jury found that it breached the terms of a builders risk policy issued to a real estate developer when it denied coverage for a cracked concrete slab at a condominium project.
NEW YORK — An English court has entered an anti-suit injunction regarding certain claims in a New York federal lawsuit over whether what the plaintiffs obtained for a facility in Afghanistan is insurance or reinsurance and whether any fraud or negligence was involved, and those claims have now been stayed in the U.S. court.
MOBILE, Ala. — In the wake of a nearly $170,000 verdict against it in an insurance dispute over the handling of a property damage claim after Hurricane Sally, an insurer has filed a renewed motion for judgment as a matter of law or a new trial, arguing that an insured church failed to establish that its claimed losses were covered under the policy, that the insured’s expert testimony was not reliable and that the “jury instructions were incomplete.”
ATLANTA — A subcontractor’s insurer reiterated its argument to the 11th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals that its policy’s exterior insulation and finish (EIFS) exclusion barred coverage for an underlying construction defects judgment, arguing that if an appellee insurer’s counterargument is not waived for being brought up for the first time on appeal, it should be rejected because the appellee fails to cite case law or the policy’s interpretation of “products-completed operation hazard.”
DETROIT — An insured counters in a response to an umbrella liability insurer’s motion for summary judgment filed in Michigan federal court that the plain language of a three-year policy provides that the policy’s $5 million limit applies separately to each of the policy’s three years for underlying environmental contamination suits filed against the insured and does not only provide one $5 million policy limit for all three years.
DALLAS — An insured is not entitled to coverage for cleanup and remediation costs incurred as a result of a crude oil pipeline rupture because the excess policy at issue contains a pollution endorsement that bars coverage for the costs incurred by the insured, a second-layer excess liability insurer maintains in a complaint filed in Texas federal court.
RICHMOND, Va. — A district court erred in finding that a primary insurer owes a duty to defend its insured against an underlying suit arising out of exposure to Legionella bacteria at an insured hotel because the phrase “good or product intended for bodily consumption” as used in the policy’s bacteria exclusion is not ambiguous, the primary insurer contends in its appellant brief filed in the Fourth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals.
GREENVILLE, Tenn. — An insurer, its subcontractor insured and a general contractor have asked a federal court in Tennessee to administratively close the insurer’s declaratory judgment action pending a ruling on a motion for summary disposition in the underlying construction defects suit.
ST. LOUIS — The Eighth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals has scheduled oral argument for June 13 in a revival bid by relators who had stood to receive about $300,000 before the trial court granted the government’s post-trial motion and vacated judgment in the qui tam crop insurance case.
HOUSTON — A commercial general liability insurer filed suit in a federal court in Texas seeking a declaration that it has no duty to defend and indemnify its hotel insureds for a lawsuit in which the plaintiff alleges that she was abused and molested as a minor while in the insureds’ “care, custody or control.”
HONOLULU — After removing a dispute over a purported reinsurance policy to Hawaii federal court, an insurer has filed an answer with counterclaims, arguing that 23 historical claims were paid in full.
OMAHA, Neb. — After three defendants cited Pennsylvania liquidation proceedings in asking a Nebraska federal court for stays in a suit over the $157.2 million settlement National Indemnity Co. (NICO) reached with Montana regarding alleged asbestos exposures, NICO says in a May 15 filing that it does not oppose a stay against one of the defendants.
DETROIT — An umbrella liability insurer filed a motion for partial summary in Michigan federal court, contending that its three-year policy includes only one $5 million policy limit for all three years and not three separate $5 million limits if it is found to owe coverage for underlying environmental contamination suits filed against the insured.
SAN FRANCISCO — An insured and its insurer filed a notice in a California federal court indicating that they have settled the insured’s lawsuit seeking coverage for property damage to its Napa County wineries caused by two wildfires.
NEW YORK — The owner and operator of five Broadway theaters and its insurers filed a stipulation notifying a New York federal court that they are voluntarily dismissing the insured’s breach of contract coverage lawsuit arising from the coronavirus pandemic.