We use cookies to customise content for your subscription and for analytics.
If you continue to browse Lexology, we will assume that you are happy to receive all our cookies. For further information please read our Cookie Policy.
Lexology logo
  Request new password

Search results

Order by most recent / most popular / relevance

Results: 1-10 of 12

Seventh Circuit finds carrier properly denied coverage for waste ash cleanup due to insufficient property description

  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • March 26 2010

The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled that a property must be precisely described for coverage to attach under an environmental liability insurance policy

Federal court disallows third-party insurance claims for environmental costs; Iqbal and Twombly implicated

  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • May 27 2011

A federal court in California recently ruled that an insurance company cannot recover payments made to a policyholder for environmental response costs as a matter of federal law, except in certain limited circumstances

Virginia Supreme Court finds no CGL insurance coverage in climate change litigation

  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • September 30 2011

The Virginia Supreme Court has ruled that the insurance carrier for an energy company sued over global climate change did not have a duty to defend or provide indemnity coverage because there was no “occurrence” as required by the relevant policy

Federal court rules insurer must cover CERCLA administrative proceedings

  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • November 11 2011

A federal court in Idaho has ruled that, under state insurance law, CERCLA administrative proceedings are “suits” and therefore insurers must cover the costs of dealing with such proceedings

Insurer must defend claims based on insured’s use of non-pollutant floor sealer

  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • February 15 2013

A federal court in Missouri has determined that a floor-sealing product used by a construction cleanup company was not a "pollutant" and that the

Federal court dismisses Hurricane Katrina global warming lawsuit

  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • March 30 2012

A federal court in Mississippi has dismissed with prejudice a lawsuit filed by property owners against several insurers and oil companies, alleging that defendants’ activities contributed to global warming that ultimately led to conditions which caused Hurricane Katrina and the resulting damage

Federal court strikes insurance policy pollution exclusion

  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • September 21 2012

A federal court in Wisconsin has reformed a 20-year-old insurance agreement, thus striking a so-called “absolute pollution exclusion” provision and potentially providing coverage for cleanup at a third-party site

Federal court rules pollution exclusion clause bars insurance coverage for slag placement

  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • August 31 2012

A federal court in South Carolina has ruled that a pollution exclusion clause in an insurance policy bars coverage for property damage caused by the placement of slag that later leaked arsenic and lead into the ground

Change of legal standard erases insurance verdict

  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • February 1 2013

The First Circuit Court of Appeals has upheld a district court decision that vacated a jury verdict awarding insurance coverage to an insured party

Court requires insurer to defend CERCLA lawsuit

  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • March 29 2013

A federal court in Pennsylvania has held that an insurer which insured an oil company from 1972 to 1982 was required to defend a case brought by the