25 results for 'cat:"Insurance" AND cat:"Indemnification" AND cat:"Contract"'.
J. Lee finds that the lower court properly found for the insurers in a declaratory judgment action over the insurer's obligation to defend a construction company in an underlying suit filed by the city after it found cracks in the welds of steel columns at O'Hare International Airport. The defects in the welds do not constitute "property damage" under the welder's commercial liability policies because there was no physical injury to any building elements beyond the steel columns with the faulty welds. Affirmed.
Court: 7th Circuit, Judge: Lee, Filed On: April 29, 2024, Case #: 23-1662, Categories: insurance, indemnification, contract
J. Sykes finds that the lower court properly found for the insurer, ruling that its policy with a dialysis provider contains a bacteria exclusion that precludes coverage of a $2 million judgment against the provider stemming from a patient's sepsis diagnosis after suffering repeated infections resulting from his dialysis treatment. The bacteria exclusion plainly applies, and the insurer was not required to conduct any further investigation into the man's claims before denying coverage. Affirmed.
Court: 7th Circuit, Judge: Sykes, Filed On: April 24, 2024, Case #: 22-1983, Categories: insurance, indemnification, contract
Want access to unlimited case records and advanced research tools? Create your free CasePortal account now. No credit card required to register.
Try CasePortal for Free
Per curiam, the appellate division finds that the lower court properly denied the insurers' motion for summary judgment in a dispute over their refusal to provide coverage in two underlying personal injury actions. The insurers failed to show that a policy exclusion applies, due to inconsistent language in the contract, and it is not clear that the accidents at issue arose from the contractors' electrical work on the site or from general safety conditions. Affirmed.
Court: New York Appellate Divisions, Judge: Per curiam, Filed On: February 13, 2024, Case #: 00734, Categories: insurance, indemnification, contract
J. Cogan rules an insurer for a subcontractor hired to install glass partitions at the American Airlines Admirals Club at JFK Airport must cover the general contractor’s defense costs for an underlying trip-and-fall action. The court finds that, while the subcontractor was able to shift liability for the underlying claims to a sub-subcontractor, that didn’t absolve its insurer of its obligations to indemnify the general contractor as an additional insured when the action was first initiated.
Court: USDC Eastern District of New York, Judge: Cogan, Filed On: February 12, 2024, Case #: 1:21cv4216, NOS: Insurance - Contract, Categories: insurance, indemnification, contract
J. Cartwright partially grants the Connecticut insurance company summary judgment against the New York insurance company's complaint that it has no duty to defend a third party in an underlying lawsuit, even as the Connecticut insurance company argues that the New York insurance company does not have a claim to any defense cost reimbursement. Previous Washington courts found that insurers can share defense costs equally, and the New York insurance company does not have a right to claim reimbursements for its defense costs because it was obligated to do so concurrently with the Connecticut insurance company.
Court: USDC Western District of Washington, Judge: Cartwright, Filed On: February 9, 2024, Case #: 2:22cv1114, NOS: Insurance - Contract, Categories: insurance, indemnification, contract
J. DeGiusti denies the plaintiff insurance company's motion for summary judgment and partially grants summary judgment to the defendant company in this declaratory judgment action concerning coverage for a motor vehicle accident. The plaintiff company fails to show that the defendant "has a duty to defend or indemnify" one of the commercial transportation companies in the underlying litigation based on the vehicle being a "covered auto."
Court: USDC Western District of Oklahoma , Judge: DeGiusti, Filed On: February 7, 2024, Case #: 5:22cv626, NOS: Insurance - Contract, Categories: insurance, indemnification, contract
J. Bryan grants the insurance company summary judgment on its complaint that it has no duty to defend or indemnify the insureds in underlying lawsuits claiming that one of the insureds raped minors. Several policy exclusions apply, including intentional bodily injury, which includes the alleged intentional sexual abuse of minor children.
Court: USDC Western District of Washington, Judge: Bryan, Filed On: January 31, 2024, Case #: 3:23cv5461, NOS: Insurance - Contract, Categories: insurance, indemnification, contract
J. Soto finds a lower court ruled correctly in determining an insurance company has a duty to indemnify a construction contractor following a dispute between the contractor and its client over allegedly shoddy workmanship, which resulted in a jury verdict in favor of the client. The insurance company argued, among other things, that the contractor had assumed liability beyond what was covered in its insurance policy, but the record does not support this argument.
Court: Texas Courts of Appeals, Judge: Soto, Filed On: October 31, 2023, Case #: 08-23-00047-CV, Categories: insurance, indemnification, contract
J. Self denies the company's and insurance company's motions for summary judgment in a breach of contract action brought by the insurer arising from a coverage dispute. The insurer seeks indemnification from the insurance company for a $5 million settlement reached in an underlying wrongful death action. The insurance company is not a party to the master agreement and therefore lacks standing to challenge its validity. The terms of the agreement require the company to indemnify the mill operator and a jury must decide the degree of fault between the company and the mill operator with regard to the company's employee's death from asphyxiation. The insurer's motion for summary judgment is partially granted as to the claims against the insurance company.
Court: USDC Middle District of Georgia, Judge: Self, Filed On: October 6, 2023, Case #: 5:20cv279, NOS: Insurance - Contract, Categories: insurance, indemnification, contract
J. Zilly finds in favor of the insurance company on claims from the apparel company and its managing member alleging that the insurance company did not honor its commercial liability policy by not defending or indemnifying the apparel company in an underlying lawsuit. The insurance company has no duty to defend or indemnify the apparel company because the underlying lawsuit does not allege an advertising injury as defined in the policy. The apparel company's use of the opposing parties' logos and art as part of the former's "nostalgia branded apparel" did not cause the injury, but rather the apparel company caused the opposing parties' damages when it did not pay the specified percentages of its sales.
Court: USDC Western District of Washington, Judge: Zilly, Filed On: May 25, 2023, Case #: 2:22cv417, NOS: Insurance - Contract, Categories: insurance, indemnification, contract