Kenco Construction, Inc., v. Porter Brothers, 2018 WL 2966785 (Wash. Ct. App. Division 1 - June 2018)

Jan 01, 2018

OUTCOME: Upholding the dismissal of Porter Brothers' claims for insurance bad faith and violations of IFCA against our client, RLI who issued two surety bonds to subcontractor Kenco.

Upholding the dismissal of Porter Brothers' claims for insurance bad faith and violations of IFCA against our client, RLI who issued two surety bonds to subcontractor Kenco.

Siena Del Lago Condominium Assoc. v. Mt. Hawley, No 13-36005 (9th Cir. April 2016)

Jan 01, 2016

OUTCOME: No coverage was afforded under our client’s Difference in Conditions policy for property damages allegedly caused by faulty workmanship and wind-driven rain.

No coverage was afforded under our client’s Difference in Conditions policy for property damages allegedly caused by faulty workmanship and wind-driven rain.

Certain Underwriters at Lloyd's London v. Travelers Cas. Co. of America, 161 Wn. App. 265 (2011)

Jan 01, 2011

OUTCOME: The $10,000,000 in excess flood insurance provided by Lloyds was triggered as soon as our client, Travelers admitted liability for its $1,000,000 flood sublimit.

The $10,000,000 in excess flood insurance provided by Lloyds was triggered as soon as our client, Travelers admitted liability for its $1,000,000 flood sublimit.)

City of Oak Harbor v. St. Paul Mercury Insurance Company, 159 P.3d 422 (Wash. App. 2007)

Jan 01, 2007

OUTCOME: The City's claim for property insurance coverage for damage to the City's wastewater treatment lagoon liner was excluded based on the standard "faulty workmanship" exclusion in our clients policy.

The City's claim for property insurance coverage for damage to the City's wastewater treatment lagoon liner was excluded based on the standard "faulty workmanship" exclusion in our clients policy.)

NCF Financial, Inc. v. St. Paul Fire and Marine Insurance Company, 2007 WL 512545 (Wash. Ct. App. Division I - February 2007)

Jan 01, 2007

OUTCOME: No property insurance coverage was afforded based on the unambiguous terms of the "Disappearance-inventory loss" exclusion.

No property insurance coverage was afforded based on the unambiguous terms of the "Disappearance-inventory loss" exclusion

Oregon Mutual Ins. Co., v. Rain City Pizza, LLC, 2013 WL 150173 (Wash. Ct. App. Division I - January 2013

N/A

OUTCOME: The court of appeals agreed with our position and reversed the trial judge who had ruled that the exclusions only applied to acts of the defendants.

◾Defended an insurance company client against claims that its CGL policy potentially covered claims in a class action suit asserting its insured had violated the Telephone Consumer Protection Act. We s ... uccessfully argued that the Statutory Distribution of Materials exclusion broadly applied to bar coverage for the class action against Papa John’s International Inc., franchisees even though a third party carried out the challenged text messaging.

NCF Financial, Inc. v. Webforia et al., 2006 WL 2244328 (Wash. Ct. App. Division I – August 2006)

N/A

OUTCOME: No property insurance coverage was afforded based on the unambiguous terms of the "Disappearance-inventory loss" exclusion.

Monarch Machine & Tool Co. Inc., v USF&G, 2003 WL 22311368 (Wash. Ct. App. Division III - Oct. 2003)

N/A

OUTCOME: The suit limitation clause in our client's first-party property insurance contract barred the policyholder's claim.

Puget Sound Energy v. Certain Underwriters at Lloyds et al., 138 P.3d 1068 (Wash. App. 2006)

N/A

OUTCOME: The underlying claim could not reach Pennsylvania Lumbermens excess level of coverage by application of the "horizontal exhaustion" rule.

Mike M. Johnson v. TIG Ins. Co., 2000 WL 122688 (Wash. Ct. App. Division I - Feb. 2000)

N/A

OUTCOME: The contractor's claim based on its alleged failure to follow the construction plans did not constitute an "occurrence."