HNRK Coverage Corner

Answering a certified question from the Ninth Circuit, the Arizona Supreme Court recently clarified that fortuity under Arizona law turns on the insured’s subjective knowledge when coverage attached, not on whether a loss was reasonably foreseeable.  In Industrial Park Center, LLC v. Great Northern Insurance Company, the Court adopted a subjective standard of fortuity, distinguishing an objectively foreseeable risk from a loss-causing event the insured actually knew “had already occurred, was already in progress, or was certain to occur.”  Following that decision, the ...

Last month an Oregon federal court held that the phrase “and/or” in a communicable disease exclusion was ambiguous and denied an insurer’s bid for summary judgment. For coverage counsel, the opinion in Scottsdale Insurance Co. v. Bruce Packing Co., Inc. provides an interesting analysis of whether a listeria outbreak is both “infectious” and “contagious”—and for lawyers in nearly every practice area, it’s a reminder that precision in contract language is important. 

Background

Bruce Packing Co. operated meat processing facilities. In 2024, the U.S ...

Today at the Coverage Corner, we look at a decision of the New York Appellate Division First Department on a D&O insurance coverage issue that is near and dear to my heart:  the treatment of “related claims,” in this case under a prior acts exclusion.  I have successfully litigated this issue in New York, written about it on this blog (see here, here, and here), and earlier this year moderated a panel at the ABA’s Insurance Coverage Litigation Committee meeting, entitled Déjà Sued:  Coverage Pitfalls and Possibilities for Related Claims Under Claims-Made Liability Policies.

In ...

This week at the Coverage Corner, we examine a Second Circuit decision that wades into hot-button topic:  liability coverage for environmental claims involving PFAS (colloquially known as “forever chemicals”).  In a summary ordered issued on May 4, 2026, in Town of Harrietstown v. Westchester Fire Ins. Co., Case No. 22-253-cv, the Second Circuit affirmed a decision from the Northern District of New York, granting summary judgment to the insured on its claim for defense costs.  We wrote about the district court’s decision in an article in Chambers’ 2026 Insurance & ...

Earlier this year, the Delaware Supreme Court issued an important 3–2 decision on the application of a “bump-up” provision to losses arising from a merger transaction. (See our previous post about this type of policy provision, here.) In Illinois National Insurance Co. v. Harman International Industries, Inc., C.A. No. N22C-05-098 (Del. Jan. 27, 2026), the court affirmed an award of summary judgment for the policyholder, holding that three D&O insurers—AIG, Chubb, and Berkley—could not invoke a “bump-up” provision to deny coverage for a $28 million settlement of ...