LexisNexis® Legal Newsroom
Nevada Supreme Court Finds An Earth Movement Exclusion Ambiguous, by Bullivant Houser Bailey PC

By Andrew B. Downs and Kristol Bradley Ginapp, Attorneys, Bullivant Houser Bailey PC The Nevada Supreme Court recently held that a property insurance policy's earth movement exclusion was ambiguous because, unlike some other earth movement exclusions, it did not state clearly whether it applied...

CGL Exclusion for Injuries to Children Ambiguous in Florida

By Barry Zalma, Attorney and Consultant The most difficult task faced by an underwriter, and those representing underwriters, is to write insurance policy provisions in clear and unambiguous language. It has become even more difficult when the underwriter is required to use language that is "easy...

McCarter & English on Panel Finds for Additional Insured Under Ongoing-Operations Clause: Tri-Star Theme Builders, Inc., et al. v. OneBeacon Ins. Co.

By Brian J. Osias and Michael C. Smith, McCarter & English, LLP Courts have struggled with the conflicting expectations of additional insureds and their insurers under the ongoing operations clauses frequently found in comprehensive general liability policies. In a recent decision with potentially...

SNR Denton LLP on Pedicini v. Life Insurance Co. of Alabama: Insurer Acted in Bad Faith by Refusing To Recognize Ambiguity of Policy Language

By William T. Barker & Ronald D. Kent, Partners, SNR Denton In Pedicini v. Life Insurance Co. of Alabama, 682 F.3d 522 (6th Cir. 2012), the Sixth Circuit held that the relevant language in a medical insurance policy was ambiguous and further held that the insurer had acted in bad faith by refusing...

Contra Proferentem – Not Always: When In Doubt – Rule Against the Insurer

The doctrine of contra proferentem , which ordinarily guides courts to interpret ambiguous insurance contract language against the insurer-drafter and in favor of finding coverage for the insured policy holder, does not always apply. However, in a coverage dispute between two insurance companies the...

When an Additional Insured Is the Party Seeking Coverage, Courts Must Resolve Ambiguities in a Manner Consistent With the Objectively Reasonable Expectations of the Additional Insured

Transport Ins. Co. v. Superior Court , 222 Cal. App. 4th 1216 (2014), [ enhanced version available to lexis.com subscribers ]. In Transport Insurance Co. , the California Court of Appeal held that because the additional insured was the party seeking coverage, ambiguities found in the insurance policy...

Insured v. Insured Exclusion Held Ambiguous With Regard to Claims by the FDIC as Receiver

St. Paul Mercury Ins. Co. v. Hahn , 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 153643 (C.D. Cal. October 8, 2014), [ enhanced version available to lexis.com subscribers ]. In Hahn, the Central District of California ruled that the claims of the FDIC as receiver for a failed bank against the bank’s former officers...

Payments by Other Insureds Held to Satisfy Policy’s SIR Endorsement

Centex Homes v. Lexington Ins. Co. , 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 164472 (C.D. Cal. Nov. 24, 2014), [ enhanced version available to lexis.com subscribers ]. In Centex , the Central District of California held that unless a policy clearly states that a self-insured retention can only be satisfied through...