Carter-Wallace, Inc. v. Admiral Insurance

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• noting that the need for “efficient response” to the logistical challenge posed by environmental insurance litigation constituted factor relevant to allocation decisions
• stating that “[the insurer] does not dispute the general rule that an insurer bears the burden of proving that a policy exclusion precludes coverage’
• holding in an environmental coverage case, that placing the burden of proving the insured intended or expected environmental damage from its conduct on the insurer is fairer than requiring the insured to prove that it did not intend or expect it
• rejecting excess insurers' horizontal exhaustion theory and adopting vertical loss allocation by year as keeping with policy principles of Owens-Illinois
• determining the appropriate method of allocation among various levels of insurance available over a seventeen-year period, under the principles of Owens-Illinois
• specifically applying a continuous trigger to coverage of damages caused by environmental contamination

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).