CHICAGO - A commercial general liability insurance policy does not cover a roofing subcontractor over faulty work claims that resulted in more than $6.6 million in damages to townhomes, an insurer says in its Jan. 4 complaint to an Illinois federal court (Nautilus Insurance Co. v. Classic Roofing Inc. and Custom Roofing Contracting Ltd., No. 17-45, N.D. Ill.).
HONOLULU - Claims based in contract do not constitute an "occurrence" under a commercial general liability insurance policy, a Hawaii federal judge ruled Dec. 16, dismissing counterclaims for breach of contract and reformation against two insurers in a coverage dispute over defects in a construction project (American Automobile Insurance Co. and National Surety Corp. v. Hawaii Nut & Bolt Inc. and Safeway Inc., No. 15-00245, D. Hawaii; 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 174243).
LITTLE ROCK, Ark. - Property owners' fraud claim is not a covered "occurrence" under a commercial general liability insurance policy because they allege intentional intent by an insured contractor, an Arkansas federal judge ruled Nov. 18, also upholding a previous decision that the insurer had a duty to defend a breach of contract claim (Columbia Insurance Group Inc. and Columbia Mutual Insurance Company Inc. v. Arkansas Infrastructure Inc., et al., No. 14-00512, E.D. Ark.; 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 160151).
TULSA, Okla. - Insureds' negligence claim arising out of damages from a wall collapse are not barred because even if there is a contractual relationship between the insureds and a contractor, the insureds did not assume risk of loss for the collapse of a wall due to the wall's allegedly negligent construction, an Oklahoma federal judge ruled Nov. 2 (Lexington Insurance Co., et al. v. Newbern Fabricating Inc. and Baucom Concrete Construction Inc. v. Doveland Engineering Co. and Baucom Concrete Construction Inc. v. Commercial Metals Co., No. 14-0610, N.D. Okla.; 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 151857).
SEATTLE - The Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on July 27 affirmed a district court's award of damages to the owner of a commercial property that was sold to a bank, with the exception of a portion that was granted to a bank in a bankruptcy settlement, finding that a retailer breached the underlying agreement by building another store within a restricted area (Cabela's Wholesale Inc. v. Hawks Prairie Investment LLC, No. 14-35157, 9th Cir.; 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 13683).
HATTIESBURG, Miss. - A federal judge in Mississippi on July 18 granted three motions in limine filed by an insurer in an insurance breach of contract and bad faith lawsuit, precluding an insured from presenting evidence, damages testimony and other testimony to show that the insurer acted in bad faith in conducting an investigation into a claim for coverage under a commercial property insurance policy (JCKP LLC v. Berkley Regional Specialty Insurance Co, et al., No. 14-0117, S.D. Miss.; 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 93049).
NEW ORLEANS - The Fifth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on July 7 affirmed a lower court's ruling in favor of a commercial property insurer in a breach of contract and bad faith dispute arising from Hurricane Ike damage to the insured's daycare center and warehouse (Steve Quibodeaux and the Kids Safari Inc., d/b/a Wee Care Childcare and Preschool v. Nautilus Insurance Co., No. 15-40567, 5th Cir.).
PITTSBURGH - Under Pennsylvania law, commercial general liability insurers have no duty to defend or indemnify insureds for a negligent performance of contract claim arising out of alleged faulty workmanship, a Pennsylvania federal magistrate judge ruled June 30 (Peerless Insurance Co. and Ohio Security Insurance Co. v. Manown Builders, et al., No. 15-281, W.D. Pa.; 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 85261).
SACRAMENTO, Calif. - A federal magistrate judge in a California on June 16 recommend that a commercial general liability insurer's motion for a default judgment be granted and that a judgment be issued declaring that the insurer has no duty to defend or indemnify its insured against an underlying breach of contract and negligence lawsuit alleging the insured's pilot car services were performed "in an unworkmanlike manner" (Atain Specialty Insurance Co. v. Richard Szetela d/b/a D&D Pilot Car Services, et al., No. 14-2991, E.D. Calif.; 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 78855).
LITTLE ROCK, Ark. - A commercial general liability insurance policy does not extend basic coverage for a claim of breach of contract, a majority of the Arkansas Supreme Court held April 28, finding that there is no coverage and considering certified questions moot (Columbia Insurance Group Inc. and Columbia Mutual Insurance Co. Inc. v. Cenark Project Management Services, Inc., et al., No. CV-15-804, Ark. Sup.; 2016 Ark. LEXIS 153).
PHILADELPHIA - Allegations of faulty workmanship in performance of a contract do not constitute an "occurrence" under commercial insurance policies and umbrella excess policies, a Pennsylvania federal judge ruled March 23, finding that an insurer has no duty to indemnify pre-tender defense costs and has no duty to provide an ongoing defense (Lenick Construction, Inc. v. Selective Way Insurance Co., No. 14-2701, E.D. Pa.; 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 38119).
BROOKLYN, N.Y. - A New York appeals panel on March 9 held that an oil corporation insured's $2.28 million flood loss resulting from Superstorm Sandy did not meet the deductible of its commercial liability insurance policy, reversing a lower court's ruling against the insurer in a breach of contract lawsuit (Castle Oil Corporation v. ACE American Insurance Co., No. 55812/13, N.Y. Sup.; App. Div., 2nd Dept.; 2016 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1623).
PASADENA, Calif. - The Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on Feb. 23 affirmed a lower federal court's post-trial rulings in a breach of contract and bad faith dispute arising from a 2008 wildfire (Craig Milhouse, et al. v. Travelers Commercial Insurance Co., Nos. 13-56959 and 13-57029, 9th Cir.; 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 3145).
HOUSTON - A commercial property insurance policy's water exclusion endorsement precludes coverage for water damage from a failed pipe that does not qualify as personal property, a Texas federal judge ruled Feb. 19, granting summary judgment to an insurer on breach of contract and bad faith claims (Praetorian Insurance Co. v. Arabia Shrine Center Houston, No. 14-3281, S.D. Texas; 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 20186).
NEW ORLEANS - The Fifth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on Feb. 10 affirmed a lower federal court's ruling that a commercial general liability insurance policy's water damage exclusion bars coverage for an underlying claimant's damages that arose from the intrusion of rainwater, rejecting the insured's contention that the insurer committed breach of contract and bad faith (Mesa Underwriters Specialty Insurance Co. f/k/a Montpelier U.S. Insurance Co. v. LJA Commercial Solutions LLC, et al., No. 15-60360, 5th Cir.).
DENVER - A federal district court erred in granting summary judgment in an insurance breach of contract and bad faith lawsuit because it is unclear whether an insured had an affirmative duty to inform his insurer that he had incorporated a company he used to purchase a commercial general liability policy from the insurer, a 10th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel ruled Jan. 20 in partially reversing the district court's opinion (Corey Christy v. Travelers Indemnity Company of America, No. 14-2168, 10th Cir.; 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 891).
WINSTON-SALEM, N.C. - A commercial general liability insurer had no duty to defend an additional insured against breach of contract claims for failure to pay a company for remediating water damage to a school, a North Carolina federal judge ruled Jan. 7, because the breach was a separate and independent act severing the causal connection with the water intrusion (Westfield Insurance Co. v. Nautilus Insurance Co., No. 14-772, M.D. N.C.; 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1432).
SAN DIEGO - Additional insureds failed to assert counterclaims for declaratory relief, breach of contract and breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing against its commercial general liability insurer, a California federal judge ruled Oct. 28, dismissing the counterclaims (St. Paul Mercury Insurance Co. v. McMillin Homes Construction, Inc., et al., No. 15-1548, S.D. Calif.; 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 147082).
LITTLE ROCK, Ark. - An insurer has a duty to defend insureds against breach of contract and fraud claims, an Arkansas federal judge ruled Sept. 23, also certifying questions to the state's high court on whether faulty workmanship resulting in property damage constitutes an "occurrence" under a commercial general liability insurance policy (Columbia Insurance Group, Inc. and Columbia Mutual Insurance Company, Inc. v. Cenark Project Management Services, Inc., et al., No. 14-00512, E.D. Ark.; 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 127573).
ALLENTOWN, Pa. - A Pennsylvania federal judge held Sept. 17 that an underlying lawsuit alleging that an insured's snack trays failed to conform to a contractually specified and required performance standards sounds in breach of contract and fails to allege an "occurrence" pursuant to primary and excess commercial general liability insurance policies, finding that the insurer has no duty to defend its insured (Firemen's Insurance Company of Washington, D.C., Plaintiff, v. Tray-Pak Corporation, No. 13-3711, E.D. Pa.; 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 124192).
NEW ORLEANS - A commercial general insurer has no duty to indemnify an underlying award because the "your work" exclusion bars coverage for damages arising out of the insured's preparation of the soil, the foundation and the house itself, the Fifth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals held Aug. 27, affirming summary judgment to the insurer on claims for breach of contract, breach of the duty of good faith and fair dealing and violations of the Texas Insurance Code and the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act (James Feaster, et al. v. Mid-Continent Casualty Co., No. 15-20074, 5th Cir.; 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 15310).
RALEIGH, N.C. - A commercial general liability insurer violated the terms of a defense agreement in failing to defend an additional insured in a construction defects case, a North Carolina federal judge ruled Aug. 14, finding that the insurer breached its contract (Liberty Mutual Fire Insurance Co. v. KB Home, et al., No. 13-831, E.D. N.C.; 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 107232).
SAN JOSE, Calif. - Insured contractors breached their insurance contract with their commercial general liability insurer when they declined the insurer's selection of counsel to represent them in an underlying strict product liability lawsuit against an additional insured subcontractor, a California federal jury found July 2 (Travelers Property Casualty Company of America v. Kaufman & Broad Monterey Bay Inc., et al., No. 13-04745, N.D. Calif.).
PHOENIX - An Arizona appeals panel held June 30 that a jury's final verdict that awarded $1,134,442 in damages to a commercial diving services company on its breach of contract and negligence claims against its insurance broker was excessive and not justified by the evidence on record, vacating the award and remanding for a new trial on the issue of damages (Deepwater Divers Inc. v. Wells Fargo Insurance Services USA Inc., No. 1 CA-CV 13-0518, Ariz. App., Div. 1; 2015 Ariz. App. Unpub. LEXIS 862).