Duty To Defend Vs. Duty To Indemnify

9 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count · browse and sort

• Jones v. Fla. Ins. Guar. Ass'n, Inc.
  908 So. 2d 435· Fla.· 2005-07-07 ·cited 102×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that the Florida Insurance Guaranty Association (FIGA) has a statutory and contractual duty to defend claims against insureds identical to that of insolvent insurers, and actions for breach of this duty are cognizable despite FIGA's immunity provisi
• Terra Nova Ins. Co., Ltd. v. 900 BAR
  887 F.2d 1213· 3d Cir.· 1989-10-18 ·cited 17×
  The majority erred in holding the stay order is an appealable final order regarding the duty to defend.
• Allstate Ins. Co. v. Wayne Cnty.
  760 F.2d 689· 6th Cir.· 1985-04-25 ·cited 17×
  The court held that the appellants lacked standing and the issues were not ripe for adjudication, thus the district court lacked jurisdiction.
• Mead Reinsurance v. Granite State Ins. Co.
  865 F.2d 992· 9th Cir.· 1988-11-23 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the underlying actions constituted two occurrences for insurance coverage purposes and that 'ultimate net loss' under Mead's policy does not include attorney fees and costs.
• Yazan Khatib v. OLD Dominion Ins. Co. & Majdi Ashchi
  153 So. 3d 943· Fla. 1st DCA· 2014-12-05 ·cited 3×
  Old Dominion Insurance Company appealed a trial court decision finding it had no duty to defend four doctors in a defamation claim. The First District Court of Appeal reversed, holding that Old Dominion must defend the doctors on the defamation allegations while remanding the ind
• Monari v. Surfside Boat Club Inc.
  469 F.2d 9· 2d Cir.· 1972-10-17 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the insurance policy's exclusion for property in the insured's care, custody, or control applied, relieving the insurer of the duty to indemnify for damages to the boat. However, the insurer had a duty to defend the underlying suit because the claim was not cl
• Reyes-Lopez v. Misener Marine Constr. Co.
  854 F.2d 529· 1st Cir.· 1988-08-17
  The court held that the contract for helicopter services constituted a lease of works or services under Puerto Rico law, meaning the helicopter was 'rented or loaned' to the insured, and thus fell under an exclusion in NHI's policy.
• Gary and Patricia OTT v. Crews
  830 F.2d 773· 7th Cir.· 1987-10-01
  An insurer's duty to defend is broader than its duty to indemnify and is determined by whether the allegations in the complaint are potentially or arguably within the policy's coverage, even if coverage is ultimately denied. A refusal to defend is not vexatious if the insurer ult
• Occidental Fire & Cas. Co. v. Bartley
  434 F.2d 55· 10th Cir.· 1970-10-13
  The court held that summary judgment was improperly granted because material facts were not resolved and depositions were insufficient to determine coverage as a matter of law.