Thanks to one of my loyal readers who often points out anti-concurrent cause cases for passing along the Colorado Court of Appeals July 24 decision in Colorado Intergovernmental Risk Sharing Agency v. Northfield Ins. Co. This opinion is right on the money in its analysis of how anti-concurrent cause language works. In the case, a roof on a building containing a pool collapsed from the weight of snow, but the timbers supporting the roof were rotted from humidity and chemicals from the pool (this kind of rotting due to pools happens more often than you would think). The way the case came to trial was this: CIRSA (I hate acronyms as much as the next English major/former journalist, but in this case the name is a real mouthful, so I'll compromise my standards a bit) had the primary lev
Read...Related Headlines
-
First party property causation, New England style
posted 204 weeks ago on Insurance Coverage Blog
- A last word this week on In Re Katrina Canal Breaches Litigationposted 236 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
-
Anti-concurrent cause: can an uncovered cause be superfluous to the analysis?
posted 176 weeks ago on Insurance Coverage Blog
-
Abracadabra: anti-concurrent cause and the search for 'illusory' insurance coverage
posted 153 weeks ago on Insurance Coverage Blog
- Is anti-concurrent cause language 'unethical'?posted 228 weeks ago on Insurance Coverage Blog
- Fifth Circuit hears arguments in Leonard v. Nationwide Katrina appealposted 235 weeks ago on Insurance Coverage Blog
- More on Northrop Grumman v. Factory Mutualposted 232 weeks ago on Insurance Coverage Blog
-
May 1 potpourri
posted 197 weeks ago on Insurance Coverage Blog