A complaint failed to trigger a duty to defend because it failed to state any facts that could give rise to a claim covered by the policy.
January 31, 2020 at 07:00 AM
Thank you for sharing!
Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.
The US Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit found that a plaintiff’s complaint failed to trigger a duty to defend the driver of a car in the underlying suit because the complaint failed to state any facts that could have plausibly given rise to a claim covered by the relevant insurance policy, and that without extrinsic evidence, it could not be concluded from the relevant documents, the complaint and the policy, that the driver was an insured under the policy. The case is Chavez v. Ariz. Auto. Ins. Co., No. 18-1473, 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 1603 (10th Cir. Jan. 17, 2020).
This premium content is locked for
FC&S Expert Coverage Interpretation subscribers.
Request a Free Trial today to enjoy unlimited access to the trusted solution for successful interpretation and analyses of complex insurance policies.
Trusted, quality content from industry experts with over 60 years insurance experience, combined
Customizable alerts of changes in relevant policies and trends
Search and navigate Q&As to find answers to your specific questions
Filter by article, discussion, analysis and more to find the exact information you’re looking for
Continually updated to bring you the latest reports, trending topics, and coverage analysis