Flores-Duran v. United States

How courts have described this case

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

• ruling that an insurer had a duty to defend its insured subcontractor whose faulty work damaged other parts of a construction project—beyond the scope of the subcontractor’s work
• holding a duty to defend arises “even if only one of several theories of recovery alleged in the complaint falls within the potential coverage of the policy.”
• “Under Illinois law, [commercial general liability] policies are not intended to serve as performance bonds, and therefore, economic losses sustained as a result of defects in or damage to the insured’s own work or product are not covered.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).