Lee v. Evergreen Regency Cooperative

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the plaintiff’s case did not fall into the “second class of cases,” and thus estoppel did not apply, because the “plaintiff’s reliance on Lexington’s denial letter was not justifiable”
• noting two limited classes of cases in which estoppel can be used “to bring within coverage risks not covered by the policy terms.”
• once an insurer denies coverage and states its defenses, it has waived or is estopped from raising new defenses
• “This Court has stated that, generally, ‘once an insurance company has denied coverage to an insured and stated its defenses, the company has waived or is estopped from raising new defenses.’ ”
• “This Court has stated that, generally, ‘once an insurance company has denied coverage to an insured and stated its defenses, the company has waived or is estopped from raising new defenses.’ ”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).