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 151

Insurer must defend Clean Air Act enforcement action

  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • May 31 2013

The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals has determined that an insurer must pay defense costs in a Clean Air Act (CAA) violation action brought by the U.S

5th Circuit holds policy covers EPA suit

  • Manatt Phelps & Phillips LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • May 30 2013

In a coverage dispute based on underlying environmental litigation, the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals held that Illinois Union Insurance Co. must

Do liability policies, particularly pollution liability insurance policies, exclude coverage for all injunctions? The Fifth Circuit says no

  • Foley Hoag LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • May 22 2013

The Fifth Circuit handed down an important decision last week, Louisiana Generating LLC v. Illinois Union Insurance Company, clarifying the scope of

Louisiana court finds settlement of environmental enforcement actions triggers insurance coverage

  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • April 26 2013

The Louisiana Court of Appeals has ruled that a commercial pollution legal liability policy covered at least some costs to be incurred in connection

Ninth Circuit narrows insurers' options in pursuing subrogation claims under CERCLA

  • Manatt Phelps & Phillips LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • April 18 2013

The Ninth Circuit confirmed that Chubb could have maintained a subrogation action against potentially liable parties if its insured had made a written

Missouri court applies “all sums” allocation to long-tail environmental coverage dispute

  • Neal Gerber & Eisenberg LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • April 15 2013

The court in Doe Run Resources Corporation v. Certain Underwriters at Lloyd's London, No. ED98086, 2013 Mo. App. LEXIS 468 (April 16, 2013), held

Oklahoma court addresses time element pollution exclusion

  • Traub Lieberman Straus & Shrewsberry LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • April 3 2013

In its recent decision in Colony Insurance Company v. Bear Products, Inc., 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 43716 (E.D. Okl. Mar. 26, 2013), the United States

Words matter settlement agreements should be enforced as written

  • Foley Hoag LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • April 2 2013

Sometimes you read a decision and it's hard to understand how there really were two plausible sides to the dispute. Arrowood Indemnity Company v The

District court judge confirms summary judgment victory for policyholder regarding the duty to defend and the pollution exclusion

  • Reed Smith LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • April 2 2013

In January, we reported on developments in Wiseman Oil Co. v. TIG Insurance, a case pending in the United States District Court for the Western

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