Security Insurance Co of Hartford v. Lumbermens Mutual Casualty Company
Year 2001
Court Connecticut Appellate Court
Case Number AC 21960
Issue
  • Allocation
  • Continuing Injury
State
  • Connecticut

Drafting history sanctions the policyholder’s right to designate which general liability insurance policies are liable to respond fully to a continuing injury. This is inconsistent with any “pro-rata” allocation among insurers.

Related Docs
Author UP's brief was written pro bono by C. William Tanzi, Esq., Eugene R. Anderson, Esq., Mark Garbowski, Brian T. Valery (Law Clerk) of Anderson Kill & Olick, PC. Of Counsel: Amy Bach, Esq.
Related Cases
Truck Insurance Exchange v. Kaiser Cement and Gypsum Corp. et al.
Year: 2022
Court: California Supreme Court
Case Number: No. S273179
Issue:
  • Allocation
State:
  • California

United Policyholder’s amicus brief discusses important issues of equitable contribution and allocation between primary and excess insurers, including explaining how one proposed equitable contribution scheme would impact policyholder rights and the future availability of funds in the context of asbestos-related liabilities.
Aerojet-General Corporation vs. Transport Indemnity Insurance Company
Year: 1996
Court: California Supreme Court
Case Number: S054501
Issue:
  • Allocation
State:
  • California

Insurance companies should not be allowed to profit from inconsistent coverage positions. / Allocation
Boston Gas vs. Certain Underwriters at Lloyds, London, et. al.
Year: 2006
Court: U.S. Court of Appeals, 1st Circuit
Case Number: 07-1452
Issue:
  • Allocation
State:
  • Massachusetts

Coverage for continuous injury when multiple policies cover the loss. The Court should adopt the position that joint and several liability should be imposed against insurance companies for damages arising from an ongoing injury. The only way the policyholder can enjoy the security it purchased…
Norfolk Southern et al v. California Union Insurance Co.
Year: 2001
Court: Louisiana First Circuit Court of Appeal
Case Number: 2002-CA-371
Issue:
  • Allocation
  • Joint and Several Liability
State:
  • Louisiana

The Court should affirm its decision to allow joint and several liability where the loss may be covered by several insurance policies and not allow the insurer’s pro-rata allocation scheme which puts the burden on insureds.