In Greystone Const., Inc. v. National Fire & Marine Ins. Co., 649 F.Supp. 2d 1213 (D. Colo. 2009), a contractor and one of its insurers brought an action against a second insurer after the second insurer refused to fund the contractor’s defense in construction defect actions brought by homeowners.
This case emphasizes the need to be especially diligent and thorough when drafting complaints in construction defect matters. Additionally, the Greystone case makes clear that general allegations of “consequential damages” without specific explanation as to the nature of such damages, may fail to trigger insurance coverage and therefore an insurance carrier’s duty to defend or to indemnify.
Construction contractors in the market for insurance coverage have few legal protections if their insurance…
In an apparent gift to plaintiffs’ construction defect lawyers, Representatives Parenti and Bacon introduced House…
HB24-1014 stands to eliminate the longstanding public impact requirement found within C.R.S. § 6-1-105(2) of…
On February 5th, Senators Zenzinger and Coleman, along with Representative Bird, introduced Senate Bill 24-106…
January 10th marked the first day of the 2024 Colorado legislative session. After the pomp…
We are thrilled to announce that Higgins, Hopkins, McLain & Roswell, LLC ("HHMR") has been…