A legal malpractice insurer has no duty to defend or indemnify attorneys who were sanctioned for filing frivolous lawsuits against four Ohio school districts, the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled. The appellate panel on Friday affirmed a ruling by …
Taking a calculated risk by selling a hazardous product isn’t the same as intentionally causing harm. For that reason, insurers must cover a court judgment that requires the company that sold Dutch Boy lead paint to pay $101 million into …
An insurer wrongly denied uninsured motorist coverage to a policyholder who was injured while riding his motorcycle even though the policy excluded damages caused by motorcycle accidents, the Montana Supreme Court ruled Tuesday. The high court ruled that the insurance …
NASHVILLE, Tenn. (AP) — The FBI investigation into whether the Nashville bombing was a terrorist act has sparked criticism about a possible racial double standard and drawn questions from downtown business owners whose insurance coverage could be affected by the …
In separate opinions, a federal appellate court affirmed rulings that insurers could dodge liability for wrongful acts by their policyholders because the actions were not covered by the policies. In a decision filed Sunday, a panel of the 8th Circuit …
The cost of cleaning up residue left behind by tenants who used or manufactured methamphetamine in a rental home was excluded from coverage by the landlord’s insurer because the policy excluded damages caused by contaminants or pollutants, the Nebraska Supreme …
A second judge has ruled that a policyholder’s COVID-19 business-interruption claim should proceed, marking an uncommon procedural win for business owners who have seen similar lawsuits dismissed by at least six other state and federal judges. Bergen County Superior Court …
An insurer may be liable for $14 million of a mortgage company’s settlement with the estates of two Chicago firefighters who were killed while battling a blaze at an abandoned laundry, a federal appellate court ruled Monday. A district court …
An insurer is not liable for injuries caused by a policyholder who shot a 15-year-old boy in the head because the policy excluded coverage for criminal acts, a split Georgia Court of Appeals panel decided. The 2-1 ruling by the …
Setting fire to a house is much more than an act of vandalism and if insurers want to exclude such damage from coverage they had best use the term “arson” in policy exclusions, the U.S. 6th Circuit Court of Appeals …