Jump to Navigation
Jump to Content

Pollution exclusion clause

Aluminum Co. of Am. v. Accident & Casualty Ins. Co.

The court affirms a trial court's holdings regarding insurance coverage for an aluminurn producing company for environmental damage under comprehensive general liability (CGL) policies and for property damage under differences in...

Kent Farms, Inc. v. Zurich Ins. Co.

The court holds that a pollution exclusion clause does not apply to a claim based on a negligence tort. A fuel delivery man brought a negligence claim against a farm after the farm's faulty underground storage tank intake valve caused...

Blackhawk-Central City Sanitation Dist. v. American Guarantee & Liab. Ins. Co.

The court, applying Colorado law, reverses a district court decision holding that the pollution exclusion clause in one of two insurance policies held by a Colorado sanitation district precluded an insurer from having to defend the...

Meridian Mut. Ins. Co. v. Kellman

The court affirms a district court holding that a total pollution exclusion clause does not exempt an insurer from defending a painting company for an individual's personal injuries caused by exposure to toxic chemicals that were used...

Maska U.S., Inc. v. Kansa Gen. Ins. Co.

The court reverses a district court decision and holds that, under Vermont law, an insurance policy's pollution exclusion precludes the insurer's duty to indemnify a clothing manufacturer for liability and defense costs incurred in...

Employers Ins. of Wausau v. Duplan Corp.

The court holds that under New York law, insurers are not obligated to defend and indernnify a clothing manufacturer from private and government damage claims stemming from contamination at the manufacturer's New York and Virgin Islands...

Briggs & Stratton Corp. v. Royal Globe Ins. Co.

The court holds that a manufacturer's failure to provide its insurer with adequate notice of a potential Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) claim negates the insurer's liability under the...

Royal Ins. Co. of Am. v. Kirksville College of Osteopathic Med.

Applying Missouri law, the court holds that insurers had a duty to defend a college in a trespass claim against its neighbor. The neighbor filed negligence and trespass claims against the college after the college punctured an...

Nautilus Ins. Co. v. Jabar

The court upholds the granting of summary judgment to an insured based on the ambiguity of terms used in the total pollution exclusion clause in the insurance policy. The court first holds that the total pollution exclusion clause is...

Compass Ins. Co. v. Littleton, City of

The court holds that insurers have a duty to defend two cities that disposed of sewage sludge at a landfill that became a Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CER-CLA) site. The court first holds that...