National Insurance Law Forum

National Insurance Law Forum

Published By The Attorneys of the National Insurance Law Forum

Tag Archives: Court

Certain Underwriters v. Mass. Bonding and Ins. Co. Court of Appeals Decision

Posted in Appeals, Recent Cases
The Oregon Court of Appeals delivered a decision in the Certain Underwriters v. Mass. Bonding and Ins Co, 287 Or App 279 (2017).  The trial court’s decision to dismiss London’s contribution claims was affirmed.  The Court of Appeals decided that the trial court properly concluded that there had been “no final judgment after exhaustion of… Continue Reading

Arden v. Forsberg & Umlauf

Posted in Appeals, Recent Cases
Washington’s Supreme Court Grants Review of Court of Appeals’ Decision Finding No Conflict of Interest for Law Firms that Represent Insurers and Defend Insurers’ Policyholders   We previously reported here on the Court of Appeals’ decision in Arden v. Forsberg & Umlauf, 193 Wn. App. 731, 373 P.3d (2016) on May 5, 2015. On September… Continue Reading

Washington’s Supreme Court Finds Coverage For Actual Cash Value Includes State Sales Tax

Posted in Recent Cases
In Holden v. Farmers Ins. Co. of Wash., 2010 Wash. LEXIS 721 (September 9, 2010), the Washington Supreme Court held that because an “actual cash value” (“ACV”) provision in a Broad Form Renters Package Policy was ambiguous, it must be read in favor of the insured to include consideration of Washington State sales tax in… Continue Reading

Washington’s Supreme Court Overturns Law Requiring Plaintiffs to File a Certificate of Merit in All Medical Malpractice Lawsuits

Posted in Recent Cases
In an opinion issued on September 17, 2009, the Washington Supreme Court struck down RCW 7.70.150, a law that requires plaintiffs to file a certificate of merit with regard to all medical malpractice lawsuits. In Putnam v. Wenatchee Valley Medical Center, ___ Wn. 2d ___, (2009), the Washington Supreme Court reversed the trial court and… Continue Reading

The Washington District Court finds that the “Efficient Proximate Cause” Doctrine does not Automatically Trump Mold Exclusions when Mold is not the Efficient Proximate Cause of the Loss

Posted in Recent Cases
In AXIS Surplus Ins. Co., et. al v. Intracorp Real Estate, LLC, et. al., the Washington District Court, Judge Coughenour, recently ruled in favor of the Insurers on the application of Mold Exclusions irrespective of the fact that efficient proximate cause was potentially a covered peril. This coverage dispute arises out of a claim made… Continue Reading

Where’s the roof? Oregon’s Court of Appeals Confirms that Undefined Policy Terms are not Necessarily Ambiguous

Posted in Recent Cases
  Insurers should welcome the Oregon Court of Appeals’ recent decision in Dewsnup v. Farmers Ins. Co. of Oregon, A136394 (July 1, 2009), because it signals the Court’s reluctance to accept insureds’ arguments that ordinary words are ambiguous — and must be construed in their favor — if they are not defined by the policy.… Continue Reading

Oregon Court of Appeals Addresses CGL Policy’s Definition of ‘Temporary Worker’

Posted in Recent Cases
In Rhiner v. Red Shield Insurance Co., issued May 27, 2009, the Oregon Court of Appeals addressed the issue of whether an individual whom an insured hired directly, and who filed a workers’ compensation claim against the insured for on-the-job injuries is an “employee” or a “temporary worker” within the meaning of the policy. The… Continue Reading

Oregon’s Court of Appeals Rules for Insurer on Products – Completed Operations Hazard Exclusion

Posted in Recent Cases
In Bresee Homes, Inc. v. Farmers, the Oregon Court of Appeals ruled that the trial court properly granted summary judgment to Farmers based on an exclusion for damages within the products-completed operations hazard in the context of a construction defect claim involving water intrusion. The insured, a general contractor, constructed a residence in 1999. Claims… Continue Reading

Oregon’s Court of Appeals Defines “Collapse”; Rules on Scope of Coverage

Posted in Recent Cases
In Hennessy v. Mutual of Enumclaw Ins. Co., A133592 (April 29, 2009), Oregon’s Court of Appeals adopted a “none of the above” approach to first-party “collapse” claims. The majority of jurisdictions that have considered the undefined term “collapse” have found coverage to be triggered by one of the following three circumstances: (1) a finding of… Continue Reading

Oregon’s Court of Appeals Rules in Favor of Insured on Statute of Limitations Issue

Posted in Recent Cases
In Pritchard v. Regence Bluecross Blueshield of Oregon, 2009 Or. App. LEXIS 51 (January 28, 2009), Oregon’s Court of Appeals reversed a trial court judgment that dismissed an insured’s claim as untimely. The Complaint, filed in December of 2006, alleged that the insurer, Regence Bluecross, breached its health insurance policy by unilaterally changing the terms… Continue Reading

Limitation to Specified Tanks Upheld

Posted in Recent Cases
In Cain Petroleum Inc. v. Zurich American Insurance Company, Court of Appeals of Oregon, A134133 (December 3, 2008), the Oregon Court of Appeals upheld a distinction in a “Storage Tank System Third Party Liability and Cleanup Policy” between scheduled and unscheduled underground storage tanks (“USTs”). The policy provided coverage for environmental cleanup costs and third… Continue Reading

Washington Supreme Court Reverses Court of Appeals’ Ruling that an Insurer Should be Allowed to “Litigate to Finality” Defenses

Posted in Recent Cases
In Mutual of Enumclaw Ins. Co. v. T&G Construction, Inc., 2008 Wash. LEXIS 1041 (Oct. 23, 2008), the Supreme Court of Washington was “asked to balance the interests of an insured defendant in reaching a reasonable settlement with a claimant against the insurer’s interest in fully litigating its insured’s legal obligation to that claimant.” Although… Continue Reading

U.S.D.C. for Southern District of Mississippi Allows Insurer to Correct Admission as to Operative Policy

Posted in Recent Cases
Geico Insurance Co. v. Hall, 2008 U.S. Dist. Lexis 77347 (S.D. Miss. Oct. 1, 2008) presents at least some evidence that in some states insurers are able to make mistakes and still prevail. When Geico filed its complaint, it included a copy of the insurance policy Geico claimed was the operative policy at issue. Under… Continue Reading