Decrease Font Size
Increase Font Size

Coverage Alerts

1

Summary judgment based on known loss provision was improper where insurer failed to present sufficient evidence that insured, prior to issuance of policy, was aware of property damage for which indemnity was sought

2

Trial court erred in ordering appraisal which required appraisal panel to assign loss values to items that may not have been damaged or never existed

3

 Declaratory relief action concerning allocation of defense fees is premature when insured's potential liability is unknown

4

Expenses incurred by insured in retrieving barrels of oil from ocean not covered under ocean marine policy as no oil leaked from the barrels, and thus there was no discharge, dispersal, release or escape of pollutants

5

Insured's actions of trimming trees and building encroaching fence were not accidental and therefore not covered, even if she believed in good faith that she was entitled to engage in such actions

6

The term "malice" as used in policy exclusion should be interpreted in its plain, ordinary sense as opposed to a "malice in law" definition

7

 Intellectual property rights exclusion is clear and conspicuous and applies to bar claims arising out of the right of publicity

8

Summary judgment was properly granted in favor of primary insurer when underlying action alleged only intentional acts and the policy's coverage for both bodily injury and personal injury required an "occurrence," but was improperly granted as to umbrella insurer that provided broader coverage

9

Product recalls in general are not necessarily covered under a product tampering and accidental contamination policy, especially where contamination does not result in or is not likely to result in symptoms of bodily injury

10

 Delayed assertion of the right to rescind may constitute a waiver of the right to do so