Engaged by policyholder counsel seeking recovery for construction defect claims resulting from installation of faulty pipe under the Houston Ship Channel. Case required contrasting coverage analysis of contractor’s Commercial General Liability versus manufacturer’s Products Liability, plus Insurance Bad Faith relative to agency’s failure to disclose available Products Liability coverage terms that would have likely covered the claim. Attorneys Michael Watson and Sheryl Kao - Martin, Disiere, Jefferson & Wisdom, LLP, (214-420-5526). Axis Pipe and Tube v. Alliant Insurance Services, et al, Cause No. 202138793 In 281st Judicial District Court, Harris County, Texas.
Product Completed Operations Liability Insurance Expert Witness
Product Liability Insurance provides coverage for claims arising after a product is sold. The coverage is known as Completed Operations Liability Insurance for contractors and provides insurance for claims resulting after a construction project is completed. Manufacturers are sued years after selling a product. Distributors are named as defendants simply because a product passed through their warehouse. Contractors have been held liable decades after they have “Completed Operations “on construction projects.
Since claims arise over a long time frame properly structuring coverage is critical as each policy renews. Coordinating policy terms of Commercial General Liability & Commercial Umbrella policies is crucial and particularly so when a Claims Made policy provides liability limits and tail coverage issues emerge. Factors complicating this coverage include:
- Clients changing carriers.
- Different carriers are used for Primary limits & Umbrella.
- Coverage change from Occurrence to Claims Made.
- Market conditions expand or restrict coverage year to year.
- Claims may involve multiple carriers.
- Documenting events which occurred years ago.
Call (817) 980-4897 to discuss your case.
Our Experience
Mr. Daniel’s experience with Product and Completed Operations Liability dates to the 1975. His expertise was gained from representing a diverse group of Manufacturers, Distributors and Contractors, including:
- Artisan Contractors.
- General Contractors.
- Automotive Parts Manufacturers.
- Aviation Parts Manufacturers.
- Plastics Manufacturers.
- Foam Board Manufacturers (EIFS).
- Oilfield Parts Manufacturers.
- Oil Jobbers.
- Steel Fabricators.
- Retailers / Wholesalers.
- Pharmaceuticals.
- International - Importers & Exporters.
While usually written with Commercial General Liability stand-alone policies are not uncommon. We offer depth of knowledge whether your case involves an Occurrence or a Claims Made policy form (or both). We offer decades of experience to assist you regarding Product & Completed Operations Liability Insurance. Please call for a brief discussion regarding your case.
Product / Completed Operations Liability Insurance Cases
Engaged by Surplus Lines intermediary’s defense counsel to evaluate allegations of Agent Errors & Omissions and Insurance Bad Faith involving placement and renewal of a contractor’s Commercial General Liability policies. Analysis involved guardrail operations being excluded, multiple policies and additional insured issues. Litigation followed carrier’s claim denial for a vehicle accident involving guardrail repairs performed by the contractor. Attorney Tom Alleman, Dykema Gossett PLLC (214) 698-7830. Guerra v. US Risk, et al, Cause No. C-3634-18-B In The District Court of Hidalgo County, Texas 93rd Judicial District.
Retained by contractor’s defense counsel to review Commercial General Liability policy structure relative to insurance requirements listed in a Subcontract. Dispute involved Workers Compensation and a third party over action. Case required opinions regarding whether the Subcontractor’s policies complied with the Subcontract’s “Additional Insured” language. Moss v. J4 Development, Cause No. 2016DCV4519, In The 327th Judicial District Court of El Paso County, Texas. Attorney Jim Mounts, Ray McChristian & Jeans, PC (915) 832-7253
Engaged by defense counsel to analyze allegations of Agent Errors & Omissions and Insurance Bad Faith involving placement of Surplus Lines Commercial General Liability. Case involved policy conditions that a general contractor be named as additional insured under subcontractors’ Commercial General Liability policies and maintain Certificates of Liability Insurance. General contractor was sued based on a subcontractors faulty work allegedly resulting in a fatality. Litigation ensued after carrier’s claim denial for failure to comply with policy terms and conditions. Attorney John Scott, Hardin, Kundla, McKeon & Poletto (973) 912-5222. Repoli v. LA Design and Construction, Lynoxx Group, et al / Coughlin v. Repoli, et al; Docket Nos. ESX-L-8325-14 and ESX-L-I011-15, Superior Court of New Jersey, Law Division: Essex County.
Engaged by counsel for third party seeking recovery for construction defect claims. Case required coverage analysis of contractor’s Commercial General Liability in contrast to manufacturer’s Products Liability as well as Insurance Bad Faith in regards to carrier claims handling practices. Mid-Continent Casualty v. Advantage Buildings, et al, Case No. 1016-CV21855, Circuit Court of Jackson County Missouri at Kansas City. Attorney David Schatz, Husch Blackwell, LLP , (816) 329-4707.
Engaged by policyholder’s counsel seeking coverage for construction defect claims. Case involved aspects of Agent Errors & Omissions and Insurance Bad Faith resulting from placement of Commercial General Liability and Products Liability Insurance coverage. Central to the dispute were allegations against the agent of failure to disclose material facts. Sanderson v. JDW Insurance, Cause No. 2009-3145, 120th Judicial District Court, El Paso County, Texas. Attorney Jim Martinez, James A. Martinez, P.L.L.C. (317) 637-0700.
Retained as consultant to evaluate ongoing projects coverage continuity issues relative to termination of a rolling OCIP (Owner Controlled Insurance Program). Consultation included forensic review of premium audit procedures for Commercial General Liability, Completed Operations, Commercial Umbrella, Inland Marine Builders Risk and Workers Compensation. Policyholder Tarrant County College District; Attorney Burch Waldron, Law, Snakard & Gambill, P.C. (817) 878-6319.
Engaged by contractor’s attorney to analyze contractual liability claim denial under Products Liability Insurance. Case involves Agents Errors & Omissions, Surplus Lines, Commercial General Liability, and aspects of Insurance Bad Faith resulting from questionable Certificates of Insurance. Cause No. 2009-65915; High Tech Plumbing v. Colony Insurance Company, et al. In the 127th Judicial District Court of Harris County, Texas. Attorney Kelly Prather, Greenwood Prather Law Firm, (713) 333-3200.
Retained by counsel for policyholder seeking coverage under a 1973 ISO Comprehensive General Liability form. Expert affidavit addressed issues involving Commercial General Liability and Products Liability Insurance coverage under Surplus Lines policies. Case also involved Pollution Liability coverage and Reliance Insurance Company liquidation proceedings (No. 269 MD 2001 In The Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania). Reliance Insurance Co. v. Raybestos Products, United States District Court, Southern District of Indiana, Indianapolis Division, Cause No. IP 97-0027-C-Y/G. Attorney Brett Nelson, Plews Shadley Racher & Braun LLP, (317) 637-0700.
Retained by hospital’s in house general counsel to provide analysis of CCIP for a large hospital addition. Engagement included assessment of how and what coverage would be extended to the owner under a CCIP (Contractor Controlled Insurance Program) in contrast to an OCIP (Owner Controlled Insurance Program). Client requested evaluation of issues involving Commercial General Liability, Completed Operations, Commercial Umbrella, Inland Marine Builders Risk (including “soft costs”) and Workers Compensation. Attorney John McNey, General Counsel, Cook Children’s Medical Center , (682)-885-1330.
Engaged to assist defense counsel answering allegations of Agent Errors & Omissions resulting from Products Liability Certificate of Insurance procedures. Attorney Elaine Lenahan – Thompson, Coe, Cousins, and Irons, LLP, (214) 871-8200. P& W Quality Machine vs. Mid-Century Insurance; Cause No. 04-00157, 101st Judicial District, Dallas County, TX.
Retained by plaintiff to provide forensic insurance analysis of coverage and premiums. Case involved issues of agent negligence over multiple policy years in placing Workers Compensation, Products Liability Insurance, Commercial Umbrella, and Property Insurance. Attorney – Craig Albert of Godwin Gruber Attorneys (214) 207-6901. Aurora Equipment v. Arthur J. Gallagher & Co.; Cause No. 04-07955-E; 101st Judicial District Court of Dallas County, TX.