County of San Diego vs. Ace Property & Casualty Insurance Company
Year: 2002
Court: California Supreme Court
Case Number: S114778
Issue:
  • Damages
State:
  • California

The “damages” in an insurance policy should be interpreted broadly to include much more than simply monies ordered by a Court. Even if a standard CGL policy is limited only to monies ordered by a Court, Umbrella Policies, such as the one in issue here…
Country Mutual Ins. Co. vs. Livorsi
Year: 2005
Court: Illinois Supreme Court
Case Number: Docket No. 99807
Issue:
  • Notice-prejudice
State:
  • Illinois

Insurance company must show prejudice if it denies a claim based on late notice
Corban v. United Services Automobile Association a/k/a USAA Insurance Agency
Year: 2007
Court: Mississippi Supreme Court
Case Number: 2008-M-645
Issue:
  • Anti-Concurrent Causation Clause
  • Katrina
State:
  • Mississippi

Interlocutory Appeal. Addresses numerous issues: 1). In an “all risk” policy, once the insured proves that “a direct physical loss” was sustained, the insurer has the burden of proof to establish what portion of the “direct physical loss” was caused by a specifically excluded event…
Cook, Heidi Sue vs. American States Insurance Company
Year: 1996
Court: Washington State Supreme Court
Case Number: 35941-0-1
Issue:
  • Pollution Exclusion and Coverages
State:
  • Washington
Continental Casualty Company vs. Superior Court (Paragon Homes, Inc.)
Year: 2000
Court: California Supreme Court
Case Number: S101679, Appellate Case #B147084
Issue:
  • Duty to Defend
State:
  • California

UP filed a letter brief requesting review or depublication. UP supported position that the underlying allegations determine both coverage and the duty to defend regardless of how they may be labeled.
Consumer Federation of America et al. vs. Maine Bureau of Insurance
Year: 2002
Court: Maine Superior Court, Kennebec County
Case Number: AP-03-37
Issue:
  • Freedom of Information Act request
State:
  • Maine

Request made under Freedom of Information Act for unredacted version of Arthur Anderson’s report on UnumProvident’s claims handling and other practices for the Maine Department of Insurance.
Consulting Engineers, Incorporated vs. Insurance Company of North America
Year: 1998
Court: Pennsylvania Supreme Court, Eastern District
Case Number: 0017 E.D.
Issue:
  • Trigger of Coverage
State:
  • Pennsylvania
Consolidated Edison Company vs. Allstate Insurance Company
Year: 2000
Court: New York State Court of Appeals
Case Number: Motion No. 956/01
Issue:
  • Recoverable damages
State:
  • New York

Insurance companies must pay the entire sum of any liability caused by an accident or occurrence so long as the accident or occurrence causes bodily injury or property damage within the policy period. Insurers cannot escape liability by attempting to limit their obligation to property…
Cold Creek Compost, Inc., et.al vs. State Farm Fire & Casualty
Year: 2005
Court: California Court of Appeal
Case Number: A114623
Issue:
  • Duty to Defend
  • Pollution Exclusion and Coverages
State:
  • California

This case involves the proper scope and application of the “reasonable expectations doctrine.” Composting facilities create offensive odors in the ordinary course of business by composting mainly “green materials.” A reasonable policyholder under these circumstances would not consider the odors produced by its operations to…
Clark Equipment Company. vs. Massachusetts Insurers Insolvency Fund
Year: 1994
Court: Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Case Number: Appeals Court Case No. 95-P-715
Issue:
  • Claims submitted to an insolvency fund
State:
  • Massachusetts
Cincinnati Insurance Company, Inc. vs. Wills, David J. And Marcia
Year: 1997
Court: Indiana Supreme Court
Case Number: 795-00-9808 CV 458
Issue:
  • Conflict of Interest
State:
  • Indiana

Insurers should not be allowed to use in-house employee-attorneys to defend policyholder clients because the inherent conflict of interest robs the policyholder of the right to a vigorous, independent and zealous defense.
Firemans Fund Insurance Co. vs. City of Lodi, CA
Year: 2000
Court: U.S. Court of Appeals, 9th Circuit
Case Number: 99-158902
Issue:
  • Post Claims Underwriting
State:
  • California

UP supports lower court decision and educates the court on insurance company tactics, post claims underwriting, etc.
Fidelity and Guaranty Insurance Company, et al. vs. German Motors Corp. et al.
Year: 2006
Court: California Supreme Court
Case Number: S158329
Issue:
  • Garage keepers policy; interpretation of "necessary or incidental"
State:
  • California

Letter brief requesting Petition for Review of Appellate decision. Under a garage keepers policy the phrase “necessary or incidental to” when evaluating scope of coverage is not supported by the broader interpretation contained in published opinions in other states or any published opinions in California.…
Fayad vs. Clarendon National Insurance Company
Year: 2003
Court: Florida Supreme Court
Case Number: 3D02-2447, Supreme Court Case No. SC03-1808
Issue:
  • Earth Movement
State:
  • Florida

Earth movement exclusion should not be narrowly interpreted.
Farmington Casualty Company vs. Cyberlogic Technologies, Inc
Year: 1998
Court: U.S. Court of Appeals, 6th Circuit
Case Number: 98-1611
Issue:
  • Meaning of “arising out of” in an advertising injury claim
State:
  • Michigan
Fairfield Insurance Co. vs. Stephens Martin Paving
Year: 2003
Court: Texas Supreme Court
Case Number: RP 04-0728
Issue:
  • Coverage
State:
  • Texas

The “all sums” language in a liability policy of insurance should be construed to provide coverage for gross negligence and punitive damages.
Fairbanks vs. Superior Court of California, Farmers New World Life Insurance Co., et al.
Year: 2007
Court: California Supreme Court
Case Number: S157001
Issue:
  • Provisions of Consumers Legal Remedies Act (CLRA) should apply to insurance
State:
  • California

The provisions of the CLRA, Civil Code Section 1750, et seq. which prohibit “unfair methods of competition and unfair or deceptive acts or practices” in the sale or lease of “goods or services” to consumers should apply to the sale of insurance.
Factory Mutual Insurance Co. vs. Northwest Aluminum
Year: 2002
Court: U.S. Court of Appeals, 9th Circuit
Case Number: 03-35147
Issue:
  • Statute of Limitations
State:
  • Oregon

The doctrine of equitable tolling requires that suit limitations in a policy be tolled between the date the insurer receives notice of the claim and the date it denies the claim.