Lennar Corp. v. Auto-Owners Insurance

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that faulty workmanship that causes property damage, not just faulty workmanship, constitutes an “occurrence” under the CGL policy
• explaining that duty to defend arises from allegations against insured and results in duty to defend entirety of action against insured
• noting that insured's factual showing triggering the duty to investigate was \more than speculation\
• noting that builder of 105 homes subcontracted all actual construction work
• stating that a duty to defend exists when the third-party suit “alleg[es] facts that, if true, would give rise to coverage, even though there would ultimately be no obligation to indemnify if the facts giving rise to coverage were not established”
• stating that a duty to defend exists when the third-party suit “alleg[es] facts that, if true, would give rise to coverage, even though there would ultimately be no obligation to indemnify if the facts giving rise to coverage were not established”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).