In El Dueno, LLC v. Mid-Century Insurance Company (2025 WL 1540329) (10th Cir. 2025)), the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed summary judgement on behalf of the insurer on the basis that the insurer did not act in bad faith when it denied the insured’s claim based on an engineering report that contradicted an adjuster’s initial findings. About The Authors
In Comprehensive Medical Center, Inc. v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company, 2025 WL 416814 (9th Cir. 2025), the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the district court’s determination that the period of restoration tied to water damage at the insured’s commercial property was the theoretical period when repairs should have been completed with reasonable speed, not the actual period of repairs thwarted by extraneous delays. About The Authors
In Bob Robison Commercial Flooring Inc. v. RLI Insurance Company (2025 WL 852889 (8th Cir. 2025), the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit determined that an ensuing loss provision of a builder’s risk insurance policy did not restore coverage resulting from defective workmanship where the insured failed to identify a separate covered peril. About The Authors
In Ram Krishana Inc. d/b/a Motel 6 Sulphur v. Mt. Hawley Insurance Co. (2025 WL 371016) (S.D.N.Y. 2025)), the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York determined that the plaintiff lacked an insurable interest in property it insured because it did not own or possess the property or suffer economic loss due to the property’s destruction. Consequently, the plaintiff was not entitled to indemnity for damage to the property it purported to insure under a commercial property insurance policy.[1] About The Author
In AMAG Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. American Guarantee and Liability Insurance Company, the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts held that a loose bolt or fitting that could be remedied simply by tightening it did not constitute “direct physical loss of or damage” to equipment covered under an all-risk property insurance policy.[1] About The Author
In Life Skills, Inc. v. Harleysville Insurance Company, 2024 WL 3792261 (D. Mass. 2024), the District Court of Massachusetts found that “collapse” provisions within a commercial property policy were ambiguous where a floor merely sagged without completely falling to the ground. About The Authors
In Zurich American Insurance Company v. Medical Properties Trust, Inc., 2024 WL 3504060 (Mass. Jul. 23, 2024), the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts held that the term “surface waters,” as used in a limitation contained in commercial property insurance policies, was ambiguous in the context of rainwater accumulating on roofs, thereby finding coverage for the insured. About The Author
In MAve Hotel Investors LLC d/b/a The MAve Hotel, et al. v. Certain Underwriters at Lloyd’s, London, et al., 2024 WL 2830909, (S.D.N.Y. 2024), to preserve diversity jurisdiction, the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York permitted a plaintiff insured to drop non-diverse, dispensable defendant Underwriters at Lloyd’s, London (“Underwriters”) which subscribed to a commercial property insurance policy. About The Authors
In BCC Partners, LLC v. Travelers Prop. Cas. Co. of America, 2024 WL 1050117 (E.D. Mo. March 11, 2024), the Court determined that the plaintiff property owner, as an additional insured, was not entitled to the same insurance coverage as the named insured where the builder’s risk policy limited the scope of recovery for soft costs and rental income. About The Author
In Mankoff v. Privilege Underwriters Reciprocal Exchange (2024 WL 322297 (Tex. App.—Dallas Jan. 29, 2024)), the Court determined that the term “windstorm” was ambiguous as utilized in the subject insurance policy. About The Authors
