A commercial general liability policy’s “faulty workmanship” exclusions – exclusions j.(5) and j.(6) – did not relieve the insurer of a duty to indemnify its insured for property damage to the insured’s non-defective work occurring before the work was complete. … Read More

A general liability insurer had no duty to defend its insured, a pharmaceutical company, against governmental lawsuits alleging that the insured engaged in a fraudulent scheme to promote opioid use. ( Traveler’s Property Casualty Company of America v. Actavis, Inc. … Read More

The cracking of an underground storage tank’s sheathing was not a “collapse” where the policy expressly stated “collapse” did not include “cracking” and where the tank, although in a state of “substantial impairment,” was not in a state of “imminent” … Read More

An insurer was not entitled to rescind a policy based on an insured’s answers to ambiguous questions in an application for insurance. ( Duarte v. Pacific Specialty Insurance Company (2017) 13 Cal.App.5th 45) Facts Victor Duarte owned a rental property … Read More

A personal auto policy’s “non-owned” auto coverage did not apply where the insured had “regular use” of a company vehicle furnished by her employer. ( Medina v. GEICO Indemnity Co. (2017) — Cal.App.5th —-, 2017 WL 510878) Facts Leigh Ann … Read More

A liability insurer’s failure to accept a policy limit demand that preserved the claimants’ right to recover court-ordered criminal restitution against the insured rendered the insurer liable for the full amount of a subsequent “excess judgment” entered against the insured. … Read More

When an auto insurer elects to repair an insured vehicle to its pre-accident condition, the insurer is not also required to pay for any resulting “diminution in value” to the fully repaired vehicle. ( Baldwin v. AAA Northern California, Nevada … Read More

In calculating whether the ratio of punitive damages to compensatory damages is constitutionally excessive, the amount of compensatory damages should include attorney’s fees awarded pursuant to Brandt v. Superior Court (1985) 37 Cal.3d 813, whether those fees are awarded by … Read More

The controlling shareholder of an insured corporation did not have sufficient legal “standing” to pursue a claim for declaratory relief against the corporation’s liability insurers. (D. Cummins Corporation v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Company (2016) WL 1726079) Facts For … Read More

In a construction defect suit involving allegations that an insured was liable for continuous and progressive property damage occurring over a period of years, successive primary insurers were obligated to contribute toward the insured’s defense costs, notwithstanding “other insurance” language … Read More