Cases

ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART AAIC’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT ON HUDSON’S COUNTERCLAIMS JESUS G. BERNAL, District Judge. Before the Court is a Motion for Summary Judgment or, in the alternative, Partial Summary Judgment on Hudson’s Counterclaims filed by Plaintiff and Counter-Defendant American Alternative Insurance Corporation. After considering all papers submitted in suppo

MEMORANDUM OPINION GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR JUDGMENT NOTWITHSTANDING THE VERDICT AND DENYING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR FURTHER RELIEF ' LEN H. DAVIDSON, Senior District Judge. Presently before the Court are a motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict or alternatively for new trial [168] filed by Defendant Hudson Specialty Insurance Company, as well as a mot

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE SOLERA HOLDINGS, INC., ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) C.A. NO.: N18C-08-315 AML CCLD ) XL SPECIALTY INSURANCE ) COMPANY, ACE AMERICAN ) INSURANCE COMPANY, ) ILLINOIS NATIONAL INSURANCE ) COMPANY, ARGUONAUT ) INSURANCE COMPANY, HUDSON ) INSURANCE COMPANY, ) ENDURANCE AMERICAN

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE SOLERA HOLDINGS, INC., ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) C.A. NO.: N18C-08-315 AML CCLD ) XL SPECIALTY INSURANCE ) COMPANY, ACE AMERICAN ) INSURANCE COMPANY, ) ILLINOIS NATIONAL INSURANCE ) COMPANY, ARGUONAUT ) INSURANCE COMPANY, HUDSON ) INSURANCE COMPANY, ) ENDURANCE AME

ACCEPTED 01-15-00478-CV FIRST COURT OF APPEALS HOUSTON, TEXAS 12/18

Reversed and Remanded and Majority and Dissenting Opinions filed December 18, 2014. In The Fourteenth Court of Appeals NO. 14-13-00492-CV ROBERT PRIMO, Appellant V. GREAT AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellee On Appeal from the 281st District Court Harris County, Texas

MEMORANDUM JED S. RAKOFF, District Judge. This case concerns an insurance coverage dispute between plaintiff National Railroad Passenger Corporation (“Amtrak”) and various defendant insurance companies (the “Insurers”) that arose in the aftermath of Super storm Sandy. During the pendency of this action, the parties filed .competing motions for summary judgment-and the Insurers moved to dismiss Amt

06/03/2026 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE January 7, 2026 Session ZURICH AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY V. TOM JAMES COMPANY ET AL. Appeal from the Chancery Court for Williamson County No. 20CV-50006 Deanna B. Johnson, Chancellor

Hudson Specialty Ins. Co. v Haley & Aldrich, Inc. (2018 NY Slip Op 01708) Hudson Specialty Ins. Co. v Haley & Aldrich, Inc. 2018 NY Slip Op 01708 Decided on March 16, 2018 Appellate Division, Fourth Department P

393 F.Supp.2d 693 (2005) AMERICAN MEDICAL SECURITY, INC., and United Wisconsin Life Insurance Company, Plaintiffs, v. EXECUTIVE RISK SPECIALTY INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant. No. 02 C 1205. United States District Court, E.D. Wisconsin. September 30, 2005. *694 *695

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE THE TURNER CORPORATION and ) TURNER CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, ) ) Plaintiffs, ) v. ) C.A. No. N25C-03-301 PRW ) CCLD LEXINGTON INSURANCE COMPANY and ) NATIONAL UNION FIRE INSURANCE ) COMPANY OF PITTSBURGH, PA, )

MORITZ, Circuit Judge. Under Oklahoma law, a primary insurer owes its insured a duty to initiate settlement negotiations with a third-party claimant if the insured’s liability to the claimant is clear and the insured likely will be held liable for more than its insurance will cover. Here the insured, SRM, Inc., seeks to extend this obligation to its excess liability insurer, G

Opinion filed January 29, 2021 In The Eleventh Court of Appeals __________ No. 11-19-00016-CV __________ EAGLE SUPPLY & MANUFACTURING L.P. F/K/A EAGLE CONSTRUCTION & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, L.P. AND METEX DEMOLITION, LLC, Appellants V. LANDMARK AMERICAN INSURANCE CO. AND SENECA

Supreme Court of Texas ══════════ No. 22-0872 ══════════ In re Illinois National Insurance Company, et al., Relators ═══════════════════════════════════════ On Petition for Writ of Mandamus ═══════════════════════════════════════ Argued October 24, 2023 JUSTICE BOYD delivered the opinion of the Court. Justic

ACCEPTED 03-16-00203-CV 13816645 THIRD COURT OF APPEALS AUSTIN, TEXAS

368 F.Supp.2d 604 (2005) NATIONAL AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY, Plaintiff, v. Norman BREAUX, Kenneth Young, Individually and as Representative of the Estate of K.S. Y., a Minor, and Cheryl Young, Individually, Defendants. No. CIV.A. 1:03CV1378. United States District Court, E.D. Texas, Beaumont Division. January 6, 2005. *605

DENNIS, Circuit Judge: The principal issues in this ease are whether the jury’s finding that a claim was made under a claims-made Environmental Impairment Liability (“EIL”) insurance policy was (1) properly guided by an instruction that defined a “claim” as “an assertion by a third party ... that the insured is liable to it for damages ....”; and (2) supported by (a) undisputed

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE IN RE ALEXION § PHARMACEUTICALS, INC. § No. 154, 2024 INSURANCE APPEALS § No. 157, 2024 § § Court Below: Superior Court § of the State of Delaware § § C.A. No. N22C-10-340

MEMORANDUM OPINION WILLIAM L. STANDISH, District Judge. Pending before the Court are two motions by the Cecil Township Municipal Authority (“the Authority”), seeking to dismiss with prejudice certain counterclaims brought by North American Specialty Insurance Company1 (“North American”) (Doc. No. 7) and by Third Party Defendants Edward T. Sitarik Contracting, Inc.,

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NORTH CAROLINA 2022-NCSC-134 No. 20PA21 Filed 16 December 2022 RADIATOR SPECIALITY COMPANY v. ARROWOOD INDEMNITY COMPANY (as successor to GUARANTY NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY, ROYAL INDEMNITY COMPANY, and ROYAL INDEMNITY COMPANY OF AMERICA); COLUMBIA CASUALTY COMPANY; CONTINENTAL CASUALTY COMPANY; FIREMAN’S FUND INSURANCE COMPANY; INSURANCE COM