J.B.D. Construction, Inc. v. Mid-Continent Casualty Company, 2014 WL 3377690 (No. 13-10138, Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals, July 11, 2014).

Insurance company for contractor has duty to defend but no duty to indemnify for settlement.

            The Court stated that the duty to defend is greater than the duty to indemnify, the insurer must defend “even if the allegations in the complaint are factually incorrect or meritless,” and doubts are resolved in favor of the insured, and then held that the allegation that there was “damage to other property” was sufficient to trigger the duty to defend.

            The Court stated the duty to indemnify is narrower than the duty to defend, is dependent on the final judgment or final resolution of the claim, and requires the insured to “demonstrate that it suffered a loss under the policy.”  It appears that the Court found no evidence in the record of “damage to other property” despite Contractor’s evidence of engineering reports in the record.


(From The Florida Bar Construction Law Committee)

Trenton H. Cotney
Florida Bar Certified Construction Lawyer
Trent Cotney, P.A.
1211 N Franklin St
Tampa, FL 33602

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Dotted Line: When Contractors Can Walk Off the Job

"Mass-timber" Sees Greater Use in Roofing and Construction Projects in Europe