Admiral Insurance Company, et al v. Tocci Building Corporation, et al

Track this case

Case Number:

22-1462

Court:

Appellate - 1st Circuit

Nature of Suit:

4110 Insurance

Companies

Sectors & Industries:

  1. November 08, 2024

    1st Circ. Agrees No Coverage For Contractor In Defect Row

    A First Circuit panel affirmed an insurer's win Friday, concluding that the carrier and excess insurers owed no coverage to a general contractor embroiled in underlying litigation regarding damage caused by a subcontractor's allegedly faulty work on a New Jersey project.

  2. April 17, 2023

    1st Circ. Ruling Won't Be Last On Mass. Faulty Work Coverage

    A ruling by the First Circuit on an unsettled question of whether Massachusetts law requires an insurer to defend a general contractor against a suit over damages caused by a subcontractor's allegedly faulty work will be influential but won't pack the same punch as a decision from the state's high court, experts say.

  3. December 07, 2022

    Contracting Cos. Say Insurer Must Defend Defect Claims

    The First Circuit should reverse Admiral Insurance Co.'s win in a dispute over coverage for a construction defect suit, contracting companies told the court Wednesday, saying the underlying suit includes allegations of property damage that are sufficient to trigger their insurer's duty to defend.

  4. November 14, 2022

    Insurer Asks 1st Circ. To Affirm Defect Suit Coverage Win

    An insurer asked the First Circuit to uphold a ruling that relieved it from defending a contractor in a suit over the mismanagement of a construction project, arguing the costs associated with correcting the contractor's faulty work are not covered by its policies or supported by Massachusetts law.

  5. October 13, 2022

    Contractor Asks 1st Circ. To Find Coverage For Defect Suits

    A contractor accused of mismanaging an apartment building construction project asked the First Circuit to overturn a decision relieving its insurers of defending it in three defect suits, saying a Massachusetts federal judge incorrectly held that there was no property damage caused by an occurrence to trigger coverage.