We are on the cusp of another milestone in the decades-long Montrose Chemical litigation, which has already yielded many important precedents in California on coverage for so-called “long-tail” pollution liabilities. “Long-tail” claims arise under historical comprehensive general, umbrella and excess liability policies for alleged pollution that was in progress through multiple policy periods—such as underground tank leaks, seepages from waste disposal impoundments, and similar occurrences taking place over time. Whether the so-called “qualified pollution exclusion” bars coverage for such long-tail claims is a question that has divided courts for decades. Now the California Supreme Court has agreed to hear a critical appeal that puts the interpretation of the qualified pollution exclusion in play—with potentially seismic impacts.
Articles Posted in Umbrella
Settle with Caution: Excess Insurers May Have an Additional Coverage Defense
Ever since the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit decided Zeig v. Mass. Bonding & Insurance Co. in 1928, it has been well-settled that a policyholder can compromise a disputed claim with its insurer for less than the full limits of the policy without putting its rights to excess coverage at risk. In a seminal opinion by Judge Augustus Hand, the Zeig court said, “We can see no reason for a construction so burdensome to the
insured,” to require collection of the full amount of primary polices in order to exhaust them. The Zeig court emphasized that a compromise payment by the primary insurer discharges the limits of the primary coverage, while the excess insurer is unharmed, since it must pay only the amount exceeding the attachment point of its policy.
Policyholder Pulse


