Kevin M. Apollo

All articles by Kevin M. Apollo

 

The Pollution Exclusion Can Bar Coverage for Alleged Carbon Monoxide Poisoning Claims

In Foremost Ins. Co. v. Rodriguez, a Pennsylvania federal district denied a motion to dismiss a declaratory judgment lawsuit filed by a liability insurer that sought to disclaim coverage for an underlying lawsuit alleging carbon monoxide exposure.[1]  In the underlying state court lawsuit, tenants sued their landlords, alleging that the landlords refused to repair a heating system, which resulted, ultimately, in carbon monoxide poisoning. After the tenants’ hospitalization, the local gas company deemed the heater on the property unsafe, and
Continue reading...  

Pennsylvania Federal Court Reinforces The Principle That Liability Policies Insure Against Legal Obligations Owed To Others

Defense and indemnity obligations owed under liability policies depend on the allegations made in the underlying lawsuit. In NVR, Inc. v. Motorists Mut. Ins. Co., 2019 WL 989393 (W.D. Pa. Mar. 1, 2019), NVR, an additional insured under a CGL policy sought coverage for two lawsuits that arose out of a heater explosion at a construction site. NVR was the defendant in personal injury litigation. In a separate lawsuit, NVR sought recovery for property damage that it incurred due to the
Continue reading...  

Pennsylvania Courts Continue To Bar To Coverage For Defective Workmanship Claims

Insurance coverage disputes regarding faulty workmanship construction defects are common throughout the United States. In Pennsylvania, under the Supreme Court’s 2006 decision in Kvaerner Metals Div. of Kvaerner U.S., Inc. v. Commercial Union Ins. Co., property damage claims arising out of poor workmanship are not covered under typical CGL policies. Recently, the court of Appeals for the 3rd Circuit followed Kvaerner, and ruled that a subcontractor’s defective workmanship claim was not covered. In Lenick Constr., Inc. v. Selective Way Ins.
Continue reading...  

Pennsylvania Supreme Court Rules that Bad Faith Does Not Require Proof of an Insurer’s Self-Interest or Ill-Will

The Pennsylvania Supreme Court ruled today that the Pennsylvania bad faith statute does not require a plaintiff to prove that an insurer was motivated by self-interest or ill-will when denying benefits under an insurance policy. Instead, the court’s decision in Rancosky v. Washington National Insurance Company adopted the standard established by the Pennsylvania Superior Court 23 years ago in Terletsky v. Prudential Property & Casualty Company, under which a bad faith claim is established by clear and convincing evidence that the insurer did not
Continue reading...