SDV Insights

The Minnesota Federal District Court recently decided against coverage for the release of carbon monoxide from an engine compartment into the open air due to a general liability policy's pollution exclusion.

As our State by State Survey on CGL Pollution Exclusions shows, the definition of the word "pollutant" can be ambiguous in the insurance context. Recently, an Alabama federal judge held that sewage was not a pollutant for purposes of the pollution exclusion in a CGL policy.

The New York Appellate Division recently ruled that insurers who are "on the risk" in extended environmental claims do not have to contribute to years when there was no coverage available in the marketplace for the insured to purchase.

Good news for policyholders in New Jersey. A New Jersey Superior Court judge has joined the majority of states in finding that Environmental Protection Agency "potentially responsible party" letters constitute a suit under a commercial general liability policy.

Qualified local environmental defense lawyers can be hard to find when the EPA cracks down on a Superfund site. These disputes can involve a huge number of parties, leaving implicated companies with few or no viable legal options in their area.

Policyholders may remember when it was groundbreaking for courts to characterize the EPA's Potentially Responsible Party letters as a "suit," triggering the duty to defend under a Commercial General Liability policy.

The "pollution exclusion" contained in an insured's policy was at issue in a recent case in Georgia (Georgia Farm Bureau Mutual Insurance Co. v. Smith et al., 2016 Ga. LEXIS 245).

Did you know that insurance coverage issues can arise from events that took place over 100 years ago?

In a significant win for policyholders, the Texas Supreme Court refused to revisit its 5-4 decision that a Potentially Responsible Party (PRP) letter from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency constitutes a "suit" within the meaning of the Commercial General Liability policy.

SDV is proud to introduce a new State by State survey showing each state's interpretation of the CGL pollution exclusion.