Duty to Defend
St. Paul Mercury Ins. Co. v. American Bank Holdings, Inc.
Year: 2015
Court: U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit
Case Number: 15-1559
Issue:
  • Duty to Defend
  • Notice-prejudice
State:
  • Maryland

UP addressed two issues in its brief: (1) under Maryland law, an insurer must show actual prejudice in order to escape coverage for a valid claim that is reported after the policy deadline; and (2) duty to defend principles applicable to the insurer should not…
Radiator Specialty Company v. Fireman’s Fund Insurance Co.
Year: 2016
Court: North Carolina Court of Appeals
Case Number: 16-638
Issue:
  • Allocation
  • Duty to Defend
  • Indemnify
State:
  • North Carolina

UP supports the position that the terms of the standard commercial general liability (“CGL”) policy compels “all sums” allocation. UP wrote separately from the parties of the case to bring to the Court’s attention the extensive drafting history of the insurance industry, which confirms that…
Auto Owners Ins. Co. v. Elite Homes
Year: 2016
Court: U.S. Court of Appeals, 11th Circuit
Case Number: 3:14-cv-01182-TJC-MCR
Issue:
  • Duty to Defend
State:
  • Florida

Under Florida law, the duty to defend under a liability policy is triggered when the complaint brought by a third party against the insured alleges any cause of action or damages that create even a possibility of coverage. In other words, the duty to defend…
Arceneaux et al v. Amstar et al.
Year: 2015
Court: Louisiana Supreme Court
Case Number: 2015-C-588
Issue:
  • Duty to Defend
State:
  • Louisiana

The duty to defend in long-latency cases may not be “pro-rated.” This rule is consistent with the insurance policy language at issue and well-settled Louisiana jurisprudence, but also with principles of equity, fairness and public policy. The duty to defend and the duty to indemnify…
Altman Contractors, Inc. v. Crum and Forster Specialty Insurance Company
Year: 2016
Court: Florida Supreme Court
Case Number: SC-16-1420
Issue:
  • Duty to Defend
State:
  • Florida

The duty to defend is the most fundamental duty of a liability insurer. The duty to defend is broader than the duty to indemnify. On certified question from the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals, the Florida Supreme Court was asked to address whether the notice…
James Nalder v. United Automobile Ins. Co.
Year: 2016
Court: Nevada Supreme Court
Case Number: 70504
Issue:
  • Duty to Defend
State:
  • Nevada

Under contract principles, a party that breaches a duty owed under a contract is liable for losses consequential for that breach when there is a special circumstance present. Contracts of insurance present a special circumstance given the special relationship between the parties and nature of…
Mount Vernon Fire Ins. Co. v. VisionAid, Inc.
Year: 2016
Court: Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Case Number: SJC-12142
Issue:
  • Duty to Defend
State:
  • Massachusetts

Under Massachusetts law, an insurance company’s duty to defend is broad and encompasses the prosecution of a policyholder’s counterclaims. UP reminded the court that the rule in Massachusetts is “in for one, in for all.” By including counterclaims that are “inextricably intertwined” which the litigation…
Hartford Fire Ins. Co. v. Tempur-Sealy Int’l Ins. Co.
Year: 2017
Court: U.S. Court of Appeals, 9th Circuit
Case Number: 16-16056
Issue:
  • Duty to Defend
State:
  • California

The most fundamental obligation of a liability insurer is to defend it’s insured against suits alleging bodily injury or property damage. The duty to defend is broader than the duty to indemnify. This duty is triggered when any of the allegations of the complaint potentially…
Hotchalk Inc. v. Scottsdale Ins. Co.
Year: 2017
Court: U.S. Court of Appeals, 9th Circuit
Case Number: 16-17287
Issue:
  • Duty to Defend
State:
  • California

In California, coverage wording in insurance policies are interpreted broadly so as to afford the greatest possible protection to the insured, while exclusions are construed narrowly and against the insurer. Exclusions must be conspicuous, plain and clear. If provisions in an insurance policy are ambiguous,…
The Doe Run Resources Corp. v. American Guarantee and Liability Insurance Co. et al
Year: 2017
Court: Missouri Supreme Court
Case Number: No. SC96107
Issue:
  • Contract Interpretation
  • Duty to Defend
State:
  • Missouri

Insurance companies have the burden to draft express and clear exclusions when they desire to limit the coverage they sell to their policyholders. Pollution exclusions in particular must be clear and unambiguous. These exclusions have caused an enormous amount of litigation and confusion in the…
Great American lnsurance Company, et al. v. Glen Hamel
Year: 2017
Court: Texas Supreme Court
Case Number: 14-1007
Issue:
  • Duty to Defend
State:
  • Texas

An insurer’s most basic duty under a commercial general liability insurance policy is to defend and indemnify covered claims. In the case where an insurer wrongfully denies coverage, a policyholder must often resolve the claim itself, and then seek contribution from the insurer after-the-fact. An…
Anadarko Petroleum Co. v. Houston Casualty Co et al.
Year: 2017
Court: Texas Supreme Court
Case Number: No. 16-1013
Issue:
  • Duty to Defend
State:
  • Texas

It is well-settled that Texas courts maintain the value of insurance and keep a level playing field between the state’s residents and insurance companies by applying and enforcing the doctrine of contra proferentem – i.e., ambiguous language in an insurance policy is to be interpreted…
Colony Ins. Co. v. Victory Construction LLC
Year: 2017
Court: U.S. Court of Appeals, 9th Circuit
Case Number: 17-35357
Issue:
  • Duty to Defend
  • Pollution Exclusion and Coverages
State:
  • Oregon

The duty to defend is broader than the duty to indemnify. It is the most fundamental duty of a liability insurer. The absolute pollution exclusion (“APE”), which exists in nearly every CGL (Commerical General Liability) policy, relieves the insurer of the duty to defend when…
Travelers Indem. Co. v. Mckenzie & Sons, Inc. et al.
Year: 2018
Court: Eleventh Circuit
Case Number: No. 18-13172-D
Issue:
  • Duty to Defend
State:
  • Florida

In its brief, UP argues that the District Court erred in determining Travelers did not owe a duty to defend based on Exclusion (j)(5). Examination of the plain language and intent of the exclusion makes clear that the exclusions have a limited application that does…
Erie v. Moore, McCutcheon
Year: 2018
Court: Pennsylvania Supreme Court
Case Number: No. WAP 2018
Issue:
  • Duty to Defend
State:
  • Pennsylvania

Insurance companies may not preemptively discern an intent to cause injury when a complaint alleges accidental injury to nullify the insurer’s duty to defend. The point of the duty to defend is ensure that the policyholder has a defense to potentially covered allegations pending a…
Sapa Extrusions, Inc. v. Liberty Mutual Insurance Co.
Year: 2018
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
Case Number: 18-2206
Issue:
  • Duty to Defend
  • Insurance contract interpretation
  • policyholder reasonable expectations
State:
  • Pennsylvania

In its brief, UP focuses on three grounds for reversal of the district court opinion: The District Court failed to interpret the insurance policies as a whole and rendered products liability coverage illusory in Pennsylvania. The District Court’s interpretation of “occurence” contravenes the insured’s reasonable…
ADIR International, LLC v. STARR Indemnity and Liability Co.
Year: 2020
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Case Number: 19-56320
Issue:
  • Duty to Defend
State:
  • California

People and companies that buy insurance to protect themselves from the cost of being sued by others, including by governments (as is the case here), depend on that insurance to pay for their legal representation. Without that vital coverage, many insureds will have no meaningful…