The district court explained that, under one reasonable interpretation, the exclusion could be read to mean that only the insured’s use of “firearms” was included. Under an “equally reasonable interpretation,” the district court continued, the exclusion could be read to deny coverage for “bodily injury” resulting from any use of “firearms,” including by a third party.
September 06, 2018 at 09:27 AM
1 minute read
This story is reprinted with permission from FC&S Legal, the industry’s only comprehensive digital resource designed for insurance coverage law professionals. Visit the website to subscribe.
A federal district court in Georgia has ruled that a firearms exclusion in a commercial general liability insurance policy was ambiguous and did not bar coverage of a wrongful death action against the insured.
Presented by BigVoodoo
The Daily Report is honoring those attorneys and judges who have made a remarkable difference in the legal profession.
Law firms & in-house legal departments with a presence in the middle east celebrate outstanding achievement within the profession.
The premier educational and networking event for employee benefits brokers and agents.
A large and well-established Tampa company is seeking a contracts administrator to support the company's in-house attorney and manage a wide...
We are seeking an attorney to join our commercial finance practice in either our Stamford, Hartford or New Haven offices. Candidates should ...
We are seeking an attorney to join our corporate and transactional practice. Candidates should have a minimum of 8 years of general corporat...
MELICK & PORTER, LLP PROMOTES CONNECTICUT PARTNERS HOLLY ROGERS, STEVEN BANKS, and ALEXANDER AHRENS
