Proprietary coverage forms are not always better than Insurance Services Office (ISO) forms. Careful comparison is required to confirm the insured is not harmed by non-ISO language. A recent Illinois district court ruling highlights an incidence where ISO’s Personal and Advertising Injury wording may be broader and better for the insured.
Generally, an insurer’s duty to defend flows from the facts alleged in the lawsuit. When the pleadings alleged damage or injury that is covered by the policy, the insurance carrier has a duty to defend, regardless of whether the insured is ultimately liable and/or the insurer has a duty to indemnify. Conversely, when the pleadings…
Insurance carriers may now have boundaries by which the “absolute” pollution exclusion can be applied, at least in Washington state. But the boundaries are pretty well laid out by two different court decisions based on efficient proximate cause. This article links to other pollution exclusion articles as well.
As ridiculous as it sounds, the entity being sued has to be an insured to garner any protection from the commercial general liability policy.
Lower tier contractors seem to be fighting back on some contractual insurance requirements – even to the point of making improper claims. One in particular is that making another party an additional insured negates the need to waive recovery rights against that party (often referred to as a waiver of subrogation). Well, these risk management…
Contractors’ Professional and Pollution Liability is the contractor’s coverage solution. Often referred to as either the Contractors Pollution and Professional Insurance, the Contractor’s Protective Professional Indemnity coverage, or simply “CPPI,” this multi-peril form specifically addresses and closes the majority of pollution and professional liability coverage gaps resulting from the limited breadth of protection provided by…
The California Appeals Court recently ruled on the application of the CGL’s j(5) and j(6) exclusion in regard to construction defect cases. This article highlights the key findings in the case of Global Modular, Inc. v. Kadena Pacific, Inc.
Every state and the District of Columbia grants insurance carriers an “underwriting period.” Insurance carriers are granted broad authority to cancel a newly-written policy during this statutorily-limited period.
An insured’s offer to purchase insurance is made in the form of the application, supposedly completed by the insured. Acceptance flows from the insurance carrier in the form of a policy. Logically, then, the insurance negotiation begins with the application.
Recently I’ve noticed insurance practitioners doing a LOT of cussing. No, I don’t mean using the traditional words that got us in trouble as kids; I am referring to insurance cussing. Yes, there are certain words and phrases used by many insurance practitioners that should not be used in polite company, mainly because they are…
