South Carolina Lawyers Weekly

Jun 25, 2013

Insurance – Auto – UIM – Insured LLC – Owner

Jensen v. Selective Insurance Co. of the Southeast Although plaintiff is the owner of the insured LLC, and although she was working for the LLC when an underinsured motorist drove a car through a wall and injured plaintiff, plaintiff was not a named insured in the LLC’s policy, and she was not using either of the LLC’s vehicles at the time of the accident. Therefore, the LLC’s und[...]

Jun 13, 2013

Insurance – Mortgage Life Policy – Exclusion – ‘Narcotic’ – Methamphetamine – Ambiguity

Hutchinson v. Liberty Life Insurance Co. Where the mortgage life insurance policy at issue excluded benefits for an injury resulting from the insured’s being “under the influence of any narcotic,” the exclusion does not apply in this case in which the insured was under the influence of methamphetamine at the time of his accidental death

May 23, 2013

Insurance -No UM/UIM ‘Stacking’ for Policy Omission

Dooley v. Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co. Although an auto liability policy failed to specify any specific amount of uninsured/underinsured motorist coverage provided, that omission did not mean the policy terms prohibiting “stacking,” or combining coverage for multiple insured vehicles, were ambiguous under Virginia law and would allow stacking. The 4th Circuit affirms the dis[...]

May 15, 2013

Insurance – D&O Endorsement – Real Property – Condominium Development – Property Owners’ Association – Developers’ Designates

Pulliam v. Travelers Indemnity Co. : Although it excludes coverage for “property damage”, a directors and officers (D&O) endorsement issued to a property owners’ association (POA) may still provide coverage with respect to plaintiffs’ claims that the POA failed to establish a reserve fund and breached a fiduciary duty to warn of the inherent conflict in developer-controlled P[...]

Apr 29, 2013

Insurance – Health Coverage – ‘Expense Incurred’ – Medicare Recipient

Barker v. Washington National Insurance Co. Plaintiff’s “Limited Benefit Health Coverage” policy only promised to pay expenses he “incurred.” Once plaintiff became a Medicare recipient, he did not “incur” the hospital’s usual fees; he was only legally obligated to pay the amount the hospital agreed to charge a Medicare recipient.

Apr 24, 2013

Insurance – Title – Real Property – Easement Endorsement – Damages – Attorney’s Fees

First American Title Insurance Co. v. Columbia Harbison LLCIn Endorsement 3 to the parties’ title insurance policy, the plaintiff-insurer agreed, with regard to a parking easement, to insure “against loss or damage resulting from an Order of a Court of competent jurisdiction requiring the removal of all or a portion of the structures” designated in the defendant-insured’s “Plans[...]

Apr 24, 2013

Insurance Fire — Insurable Interest – Real Property – Eviction

Nationwide Agribusiness Insurance Co. v. Walters Although defendant’s stepdaughter owned the house in which he lived, he bought homeowner’s insurance for the house as “owner-occupied”; furthermore, the stepdaughter evicted defendant (and her mother) 10 days before the property was damaged by fire.

Apr 10, 2013

Insurance – CGL – Contractor – Large Project – Different Insurers – Corporate Merger

Cincinnati Insurance Co. v. Crossmann Communities of North Carolina, Inc. : Although Harleysville Mutual Insurance Co. only insured the contractor for the beginning -- only 13 of 84 buildings -- of a building project, Harleysville must defend the contractor in an underlying lawsuit that alleges water intrusion in all of the project’s buildings

Apr 10, 2013

Insurance – CGL – Multiple Insurers — Defense Costs – No Contribution – Primary & Excess Insurers

Cincinnati Insurance Co. v. Crossmann Communities of North Carolina, Inc. : In an underlying lawsuit filed by a homeowners’ association against the contractor who built a resort, multiple insurers may be responsible for different damages, depending on their coverage periods.

Apr 4, 2013

Insurance – CGL – Duty to Defend – Contractor – Progressive Property Damage – Different Insurers – Contribution Claim

Assurance Co. of America v. Penn-America Insurance Co. Even though both parties insured a contractor during different years when progressive property damage was allegedly resulting from his work, when the plaintiff-insurer undertook the defense of the insured contractor, it did no more than what it believed it was obligated to do under the terms of its contract and acted, not for the def[...]

Apr 1, 2013

Insurance – Commercial Auto – Tow Truck – Repossession Attempt – Police Intervention

United Financial Casualty Co. v. Butler Where plaintiff issued a commercial auto policy to insure the defendant-repo men’s tow truck, plaintiff has no duty to defend or indemnify the repo men in a lawsuit filed by a homeowner after (1) the repo men came to his property to repossess someone else’s car, (2) the homeowner brandished a shotgun and told the repo men to leave, (3) the repo[...]

Mar 18, 2013

Insurance – Garage Policy – Garage Operations & Covered Auto – Separate Coverage – Duty to Defend

Diamond State Insurance Co. v. Estate of McNeal The garage insurance policy at issue clearly states that, if the $300,000 “garage operations” coverage applies, then the $300,000 “covered auto” coverage does not apply, and vice versa; therefore, the coverages may not be stacked.