United States Fidelity Guaranty Co. v. Warsaw Chemical Co. - 4/30/13

Back to TopPrintE-mail
Tuesday  April 30, 2013 
1:30 PM  EST

1:30 p.m. 49A04-1203-CT-97. In this litigation, Appellee/Cross-Appellant Warsaw Chemical Company seeks indemnity from its insurer Appellant/Cross-Appellee United States Fidelity and Guaranty Company (“USF&G”) for an environmental cleanup. USF&G appeals from the trial court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of Warsaw Chemical, who also cross-appeals, challenging certain rulings in favor of USF&G and arguing an alternate ground on which it was entitled to summary judgment. USF&G contends that the trial court erred in ruling that a (1) 1992 release executed by Warsaw Chemical did not cover certain insurance policies, (2) Warsaw Chemical’s claim was not time-barred, (3) coverage existed under the personal injury provisions of its policy with Warsaw Chemical, and (4) all of Warsaw Chemical’s costs were covered even if coverage did exist. Warsaw Chemical responds to all of these arguments and additionally claims that (1) the Court of Appeals should affirm for the alternate reason that coverage exists under property damage provisions of the relevant policies and (2) it is entitled to prejudgment interest.

Back to Events
Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. For many years this young man was "family" being my cousin's son. Then he decided to ignore my existence and that of my daughter who was very hurt by his actions after growing up admiring, Jason. Glad he is doing well, as for his opinion, if you care so much you wouldn't ignore the feelings of those who cared so much about you for years, Jason.

  2. Good riddance to this dangerous activist judge

  3. What is the one thing the Hoosier legal status quo hates more than a whistleblower? A lawyer whistleblower taking on the system man to man. That must never be rewarded, must always, always, always be punished, lest the whole rotten tree be felled.

  4. I want to post this to keep this tread alive and hope more of David's former clients might come forward. In my case, this coward of a man represented me from June 2014 for a couple of months before I fired him. I knew something was wrong when he blatantly lied about what he had advised me in my contentious and unfortunate divorce trial. His impact on the proceedings cast a very long shadow and continues to impact me after a lengthy 19 month divorce. I would join a class action suit.

  5. The dispute in LB Indiana regarding lake front property rights is typical of most beach communities along our Great Lakes. Simply put, communication to non owners when visiting the lakefront would be beneficial. The Great Lakes are designated navigational waters (including shorelines). The high-water mark signifies the area one is able to navigate. This means you can walk, run, skip, etc. along the shores. You can't however loiter, camp, sunbath in front of someones property. Informational signs may be helpful to owners and visitors. Our Great Lakes are a treasure that should be enjoyed by all. PS We should all be concerned that the Long Beach, Indiana community is on septic systems.

ADVERTISEMENT