Cincinnati Insurance Co. v. Vance

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that insurer may choose not to defend putative insured at its own peril, but may be liable for judgment if court determines there was policy coverage
• holding that damages for breach of duty to defend potentially include liability for judgment
• holding that the duty to defend is separate from the duty to indemnify
• explaining that an insurer’s “decision to deny coverage and the duty to defend, to take no action, promptly communicated so that the putative insured will suffer no prejudice in making his own defense if he wishes to do so, does not cause an estoppel”
• “[An insurer’s] decision to deny coverage and the duty to defend ... does not cause an estoppel.”
• “The essence of our holding is that the coverage question will turn on the true facts as judicially determined and not on the claims of either party, or on the allegations of the complaint against the putative insured”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).