Read the Fine Print: Contingent Coverage is Not Excess Coverage
In Bartowiak v. Underwriters at Lloyd’s, London, 2015 IL App (1st) 133549 (August 31, 2015), the Illinois Court of Appeals ruled that the defendant-insurer did not have a duty to defend or indemnify...
View ArticleNo Coverage for Innocent Insureds: West Virginia Supreme Court Decision...
The distinction between the terms “the insured” and “any insured” in an insurance policy is a critical one and continues to spark coverage litigation. This distinction was key to the Supreme Court of...
View ArticleFive Yards for Encroachment: Prematurity Doctrines Found to Preclude...
In Pekin Insurance Co. v. St. Paul Lutheran Church, 2016 IL App (4th) 150966, the Illinois Appellate Court refused, based on the Prematurity Doctrine, to consider extrinsic evidence in an insurer’s...
View ArticleFlorida Bridge Collapse Resolution Offers Workaround for Multiple Claimant...
A recent bankruptcy plan filed by Munilla Construction Management (MCM)–the general contractor for the failed pedestrian bridge at Florida International University (FIU)–paves the way for judicially...
View Article
