Topic
Every decision we've filed under Insurance.
The Ninth Circuit affirmed the dismissal of several claims in a challenge to California's bail agent licensing law because the injuries were speculative and not yet ripe. However, the court reversed the denial of leave to amend, holding that the plaintiff could have pleaded facts to establish ripeness and a plausible retaliation claim.
The Ninth Circuit affirmed summary judgment for an insurance company, ruling that saltwater qualifies as a pollutant under commercial general liability policies. The court held that because the plaintiff conceded saltwater was an irritant or contaminant, it met the policy definition regardless of whether it constituted waste.
The Ninth Circuit reversed a district court's summary judgment, holding that an insurer breached its contract by refusing to defend an insured when the policy's sexual abuse exclusion was ambiguous. The court ruled that Washington law requires insurers to defend claims that could conceivably be covered, even if some allegations fall under an exclusion.
The Third Circuit affirmed summary judgment for Maserati because the plaintiffs failed to provide expert testimony proving a vehicle defect caused a garage fire. The court clarified that while expert testimony is not always required for complex instruments, it is necessary when the average juror cannot deduce the cause of failure without technical knowledge.
The Seventh Circuit affirmed summary judgment for Progressive and Secura, holding that Illinois law permits anti-stacking provisions to cap total recovery at the highest single-policy limit. The court ruled that the plaintiff's existing $900,000 recovery from other sources satisfied the cap, leaving the insurers liable only for the remaining $100,000.
The Fifth Circuit affirmed the dismissal of a fraud lawsuit against Saudi Aramco, ruling that the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act bars the suit because the alleged torts occurred in Saudi Arabia. The court held that the defendant's Houston-based subsidiary did not qualify as an agency or instrumentality of the foreign state for the purposes of the commercial-activity exception.
The Fifth Circuit affirmed summary judgment, holding that Louisiana's workers' compensation statute provides the exclusive remedy for a federal inspector injured while performing duties under a contract service agreement. The court ruled that the exporter was a statutory employer under the two-contract defense, thereby barring the inspector's tort claims against the company.
The Ninth Circuit vacated the district court's denial of a motion to compel arbitration because the record contains a genuine dispute of material fact regarding the formation of a valid agreement under California contract law. The appellate court held that unresolved factual issues concerning fraud and execution require resolution before arbitration can be ordered.
The Fifth Circuit affirmed a district court order requiring plaintiffs to pay approximately $37,683 in costs to prevailing defendants despite the plaintiffs' claim of indigency. The court held that a disparity in financial resources between the parties is insufficient on its own to overcome the presumption that costs should be awarded to the prevailing party under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54(d)(1).
The Fourth Circuit dismissed the appeal regarding the underlying dismissal and denial of post-judgment motions because the notice of appeal was filed after the mandatory thirty-day deadline. The court affirmed the separate order enjoining further filings, finding no reversible error in the district court's decision.