March 2025 Insurance Update

In this month’s update, we discuss cases involving related wrongful acts, wildfires, concealment of a weapon, concealment of climate risks, and road rage.

We begin in Delaware, where the state’s high court determines whether a securities action is related to an earlier SEC investigation and subpoena for purposes of determining which claims-made policies apply.

In California, the Ninth Circuit considers whether wildfire debris – without any burn damage – is “direct physical loss to property.”

In Pennsylvania, parents helped delay the discovery of the weapon their son used to shoot a former classmate. The Third Circuit decides whether the insurer must defend the parents in a suit by the victim’s mother for emotional distress.

In Florida, the insured’s reckless driving enraged a neighbor to fire shots at the vehicle, injuring a passenger. Does the incident arise out of the ownership, maintenance, or use of a motor vehicle for purposes of coverage under an auto policy?

Last October, the Hawaii Supreme Court found that the pollution exclusion barred coverage for climate change suits against an oil company. A federal district court now decides whether insurers must defend the oil company under policies without a pollution exclusion. That obligation depends on the timing of the alleged damage caused by greenhouse gas emissions.

We hope you find these cases interesting and informative.