| IN THE NEWS recent articles |
 |
| A Texas Federal Court recently granted summary judgment in favor of Admiral Insurance Company, and in finding that Admiral neither had the duty to defend nor indemnify the plaintiff, the court also took the unusual step of finding that the duty to indemnify was justiciable. In particular, the Court found that Admiral did not have the duty to defend the plaintiff because the damages the plaintiff alleged--damages from a well that had not yet been put into action or service--did not fall within the policy's definition of "property damage". Thus, the Court found that the duty to indemnify was justiciable because the same reasons that negated Admiral's duty to defend the plaintiff also negated its duty to indemnify. The entirety of the Court's opinion may be viewed at Cook v. Admiral Ins. Co., No. 2:09-CV-0109-J, 2010 WL 2605256 (N.D. Tex. June 29, 2010). |
|
Copyright
2007 © Rymer, Moore, Jackson & Echols, P.C. All rights reserved. |