In reading one of Ted Frank's posts yesterday at Overlawyered, I was reminded that I have neglected to blog about a strange case from Washington, Woo v. Fireman's Fund. I have actually followed this case for a couple years -- Washington is right across the Columbia River from Portland and I practice a fair amount in the state -- and I know Washington coverage law well, so I'm overdue in writing about the case.This decision, where the Washington Supreme Court found an insurer had a duty to defend a dentist accused of improper conduct, is, I regret to say, a mess. I don't say that merely because the case involves a dentist, Dr. Woo, who taunted one of his employees, Tina Alberts, about her pet pig, Walter, with photos of skinned wild boars, saying that "There is how Walter will lo
Read...Related Headlines
- Fifth Circuit hears arguments in Leonard v. Nationwide Katrina appealposted 235 weeks ago on Insurance Coverage Blog
-
Louisiana Supreme Court to hear oral arguments on appeal of Landry case, interpretation of Valued Policy Law
posted 206 weeks ago on Insurance Coverage Blog
- Initial impressions on Fifth Circuit's decision in In Re Katrina Canal Breaches Litigationposted 236 weeks ago on Insurance Coverage Blog
- A couple Fifth Circuit Katrina cases from earlier this weekposted 235 weeks ago on Insurance Coverage Blog
-
Landry Valued Policy Law: Louisiana Supreme Court rules for Citizens Property
posted 194 weeks ago on Insurance Coverage Blog
-
U.S. Supreme Court rejects cert. for In Re Katrina Canal Breaches case
posted 207 weeks ago on Insurance Coverage Blog
-
Reaction to Sher case
posted 200 weeks ago on Insurance Coverage Blog
-
Reaction to Sher cases
posted 200 weeks ago on Insurance Coverage Blog
- Louisiana Fourth Circuit finds flood exclusion ambiguousposted 220 weeks ago on Insurance Coverage Blog
-
Louisiana Fourth Circuit finds flood exclusion ambiguous
posted 220 weeks ago on Insurance Coverage Blog