HNRK Coverage Corner
In orders issued last week, a panel of the Ninth Circuit and a federal district judge in Hawaii certified questions to the Supreme Courts of Alaska and Hawaii regarding the scope of a liability policy’s “absolute” or “total” pollution exclusion. The state high courts will address whether carbon monoxide and carbon dioxide constitute “pollutants” under such an exclusion.
Ninth Circuit Order – Is Carbon Monoxide a Pollutant Under a Homeowners Policy?
The Ninth Circuit’s order in Estate of Wheeler v. Garrison Property & Casualty Ins. Co., No. 22-35484, issued on ...
On April 9, 2020, the Second Circuit issued a decision in Brooklyn Center of Psychotherapy, Inc. v. Philadelphia Indemnity Ins. Co., Docket No. 19-2266-cv, certifying the following question to the New York Court of Appeals: Can a discrimination claim based on a “failure to accommodate” theory trigger coverage under a general commercial liability policy?
The coverage dispute in this case arose from a disability discrimination lawsuit brought by a deaf woman, who alleged that the Brooklyn Center for Psychotherapy discriminated against her, in violation of state and federal ...
On November 20, 2019, Judge Briccetti of the SDNY issued a decision in Metropolitan Prop. & Cas. Ins. Co. v. Comley, Case No. 18-cv-9259 (VB), holding that a liability insurer properly denied defense coverage, under an exclusion for “intentional and criminal acts”, for a lawsuit alleging “negligent supervision” of the insureds’ minor son, who committed a sexual assault. The policy at issue—a homeowners’ policy—covered both the parents and their “relatives”, who are “resident[s] of the same household.” The policy’s “intentional and criminal ...
On December 21, 2018, Justice Sherwood of the New York County Commercial Division issued a decision in Zurich Am. Ins. Co. v Don Buchwald Assoc., Inc., 2018 NY Slip Op 33325(U), holding that an intentional tort could be a covered occurrence, triggering a CGL insurer’s duty to defend.
This insurance coverage case arose from a salacious lawsuit by professional wrestler Terry Gene Bollea (better known by his stage name, Hulk Hogan). Bollea sued a talent agency (DBA) and its employee (Burton) in Florida state court for their alleged role in the dissemination of a sex tape through the ...
On July 2, 2018, Justice Platkin of the Albany County Commercial Division issued a decision in Dan Tait, Inc. v. Farm Family Cas. Ins. Co., 2018 NY Slip Op 28205, holding that a series of thefts by an employee constituted a single “occurrence,” subject to a single $15,000 coverage limit, under the “Employee Dishonesty” section of a business insurance policy.
The employee stole a total of $500,000 from the insured, employing several different methods. The insured argued that each of the employee’s schemes should be treated as a separate occurrence based on the common law ...
Search Blog
Recent Posts
- Second Circuit Rules that CGL Insurer Must Provide Defense Coverage for PFAS-Related Environmental Claim
- Delaware Supreme Court Holds That D&O Policy’s “Bump-Up” Provision Does Not Exclude Coverage for $28 Million Post-Merger Securities Settlement
- Federal District Court in Washington State Rules That Insurer Acted in Bad Faith By Denying Defense Coverage Based On “Arguable” Interpretation of the Policy
- Ninth Circuit Rules Insurer Acted in Bad Faith by Denying Insured a Defense Where “A Conceivable Basis for Coverage Existed”
- Experts Are Bracing for a “Brutal” Wildfire Season—Now is the Time for Utility Companies and Other Business with Exposure to Wildfire Liabilities to Stress-Test Their Insurance Programs
- Canons of Construction: Divided Panel of the Second Circuit Holds General Contractor Entitled to Additional Insured Coverage Under Subcontractor’s CGL Policy
- Washington Federal Court Addresses Reformation of CGL Policy, and Late Notice and Prior Acts Exclusions under D&O Policy
- Delaware Court Rules DOJ’s Civil Investigative Demand Constitutes a Covered Claim
- Seventh Circuit Clarifies Excess Insurer Duties and Additional Insurer Analysis Under Indiana Law
- Southern District Uses Mutual Mistake Doctrine to Reform Policy and Find Coverage
Popular Categories
- D&O Policies
- Insurance Coverage
- Additional Insured Endorsement
- Construction
- E&O Policies
- Duty to Defend
- Notice
- Damages
- Occurrence/Accident
- Business Interruption Coverage
- Related Claims
- Bad Faith Claims Handling
- Rules of Interpretation
- Indemnification and Advancement
- COVID-19
- Cyber Coverage
- Duty to Cooperate
- Advertising Injury
- Personal and Advertising Injury
- Insurance Brokers
- Confict of Laws
- Discovery/Disclosure
- Appraisal
- Excess Insurance
- Attorney Fees
- Assignment of Claims
- Covered Loss
- Disability discrimination
- Implied Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing
- Privilege/Work Product
- Intellectual Property
- Priority of Coverage
- Contracts
- Professional Malpractice
- Rescission
- Intervention/Joinder
- Settlements
- Subrogation
- General Business Law
- Unfair Claims Settlement Practices
- CGL Policies
- Policy Exclusions
- Pollution Exclusion
Archives
- May 2026
- April 2026
- March 2026
- February 2026
- January 2026
- December 2025
- November 2025
- October 2025
- September 2025
- May 2025
- February 2025
- December 2024
- November 2024
- August 2024
- July 2024
- June 2024
- May 2024
- April 2024
- March 2024
- February 2024
- January 2024
- December 2023
- November 2023
- September 2023
- August 2023
- June 2023
- May 2023
- April 2023
- March 2023
- January 2023
- December 2022
- September 2022
- May 2022
- April 2022
- March 2022
- November 2021
- June 2021
- February 2021
- January 2021
- December 2020
- November 2020
- October 2020
- September 2020
- August 2020
- April 2020
- March 2020
- February 2020
- January 2020
- December 2019
- November 2019
- October 2019
- September 2019
- August 2019
- July 2019
- May 2019
- April 2019
- March 2019
- February 2019
- January 2019
- December 2018
- November 2018
- October 2018
- September 2018
- August 2018
- July 2018
- May 2018
- April 2018
- March 2018
- February 2018
- January 2018
