Pollution exclusion puts unwary insureds at risk; the application of environmental clauses to unrelated areas of coverage is catalyst for litigation
Article Abstract:
Attempts by insurance companies to apply the absolute pollution exclusion to other areas of coverage have often led to litigation. In arguing against such an application, insureds have attempted to show that the exclusion has no place in cases with no environmental damage. Courts in such cases are faced with both insurance and contract law issues. Insurance law might favor the interests of the insured in deciding products liability and workplace accident claims, while contract law might be inclined to apply the exclusion more broadly. In any case, insureds should be prepared to go to court on claims they once assumed they were covered for.
Publication Name: The National Law Journal
Subject: Law
ISSN: 0162-7325
Year: 1995
User Contributions:
Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:
Insurers, policyholders fight for the last word
Article Abstract:
The 'sudden and accidental' pollution exclusion to be found in the majority of third-party liability insurance policies has engendered much litigation. Most of this litigation has tried to deal with the meaning of 'sudden and accidental.' Most state supreme courts have come down on the side of policyholders, and have been open to dictionary and other evidence that 'sudden and accidental' has more than one reasonable meaning, while the insurance industry has tried to impose on the phrase a singular, time-constrained meaning.
Publication Name: The National Law Journal
Subject: Law
ISSN: 0162-7325
Year: 1992
User Contributions:
Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:
States initiate environmental insurance reforms; at the state level, a movement is afoot to protect policyholders and minimize coverage disputes
Article Abstract:
States are putting new regulations in place to reduce coverage disputes concerning environmental or pollution coverage, and many courts are rejecting insurers' broad reading of pollution exclusion clauses. In LA the state supreme court found that the insurance industry was abusing pollution exclusions and using them in ways inconsistent with their history and original intent. Courts nationwide are limiting such exclusions to deliberate pollution by businesses capable of inflicting severe harm.
Publication Name: The National Law Journal
Subject: Law
ISSN: 0162-7325
Year: 1995
User Contributions:
Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:
- Abstracts: Global justice edges closer; creation of international criminal court under negotiation. Indiana Jones, Esq.: lawyer-explorer finds the lost city of Ubar
- Abstracts: Appellate review in executive departments and agencies. Federal administrative law judges: the relevance of past choices to future decisions
- Abstracts: Getting a fix on fees: computers chip away at hourly billing in real estate matters. Real reform
- Abstracts: Dilution legislation gains momentum but raises some concerns; a federal law might impair First Amendment rights
- Abstracts: A tangled web: IOLTA and the banks. Lessons from the savings and loan debacle: the case for further financial deregulation