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

Third Circuit finds duty to defend because 76 MTBE lawsuits arose out of a single “occurrence”

  • Hunton & Williams LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • February 23 2007

In Sunoco, Inc. v. Illinois National Ins. Co., Nos. 05-4992, 06-1295, 2007 WL 295267 (3d Cir. Jan. 31, 2007), the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit found that an insurer had a duty to defend 76 lawsuits brought against Sunoco, Inc. (“Sunoco”) for claims arising from its use of a gasoline additive, methyl tertiary-butyl ether (“MtBE”

Massachusetts holds that pollution exclusion in general liability contract bars coverage for home heating oil leak

  • Hunton & Williams LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • July 18 2007

The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court recently held that an absolute pollution exclusion in a general liability contract excluded coverage for a home heating oil leak caused by an installer of home heating equipment

Policyholders’ ability to obtain insurance coverage for cleanups and other liabilities relating to accidental pollution in Pennsylvania is greatly enhanced

  • Reed Smith LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • March 14 2008

On March 10, 2008, in a case in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, Simon Wrecking Company, Inc., et al. v. Continental Casualty Company, et al., the Honorable Anita B. Brody issued a decision describing the proof needed by a policyholder with pollution-related liabilities to prevent its insurance company from denying responsibility based on the so-called “sudden and accidental” pollution exclusion

US District Court for the Southern District of New York finds term “contaminant” contained in definition of pollution in first party property insurance ambiguous precluding summary judgment in case involving WTC particulates

  • Hunton & Williams LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • March 31 2008

In Ocean Partners, LLC v. North River Insurance Co., No 04 CV 470 (BSJ) (GWG), 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 14967 (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 28, 2008), the Southern District of New York denied an insurer’s motion for summary judgment with regard to the application of a pollution exclusion in a first party property policy to the infiltration of particulates from the WTC collapse in a nearby insured building

Federal judge in Florida rules underground storage tank policy cannot be rescinded

  • Edwards Wildman Palmer LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • April 30 2008

A federal district court judge in Florida recently ruled that an insurer cannot retroactively rescind a liability policy insuring underground storage tanks (“USTs”) for an alleged material misrepresentation in the policy application

New Hampshire Supreme Court endorses pro rata allocation among triggered general liability policies by years and limits

  • Hunton & Williams LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • November 5 2007

On certified questions from the United States District Court for the District of New Hampshire, the New Hampshire Supreme Court has decided that New Hampshire will allocate liability for long-tail environmental claims pro rata by years and limits among triggered policies

New Hampshire Supreme Court adopts pro rata allocation methodology in environmental coverage case

  • Edwards Wildman Palmer LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • December 11 2007

In a matter of first impression, the New Hampshire Supreme Court recently held that a pro rata allocation method, as opposed to a joint and several approach, should be applied in an environmental coverage action for purposes of allocating long-term pollution damage among multiple triggered insurance policies

Insured’s environmental claims not time barred under policy language

  • Gardere Wynne Sewell LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • July 31 2008

In Charter Int'l. Oil Co.v. Travelers Casualty and Surety Co., No. 06-324 (D.R.I., June 9, 2008), the Rhode Island federal district court held that the state's 10 year limitations period did not expire even though the insured waited 14 years to file a lawsuit after entering an agreement with the state to clean up the covered property

First Circuit Federal Appeals Court certifies important allocation questions to Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

  • Edwards Wildman Palmer LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • June 20 2008

The U.S. First Circuit Court of Appeals recently certified to the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court the following critical questions regarding allocation of loss to multiple insurers for long-term environmental contamination

New Jersey appellate court holds D&O policy pollution exclusion inapplicable

  • Wiley Rein LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • August 28 2008

A New Jersey intermediate court of appeals has held that the pollution exclusion in a D&O insurance policy did not bar coverage for a securities fraud action alleging that the insured corporation had misrepresented its contingent liabilities for asbestos-related claims retained by a spun-off subsidiary

Current Search

Suggested Facets

Author

Firm Name

Jurisdiction

Workarea

© Copyright 2006-2013 Globe Business Publishing Ltd | Cookies | Disclaimer | Privacy policy