Skip to Content
Beginning with the decision in Kvaerner Metals v. Commercial Union Insurance, 589 Pa. 317, 908 A.2d 888 (2006), the substantive law of Pennsylvania concerning the “occurrence” requirement in liability policies, particularly in the context of the construction job site, has grown rapidly. An important milestone is the nonconstruction case of Donegal Mutual Insurance vs. Baumhammers, Pa. Super. 32, 893 A.2d 797 (2006), which, unlike Kvaerner, found an occurrence sufficiently pled against the insured to trigger a duty to defend. Zurich American Insurance v. RM Shoemaker, No. 12-2268, 2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 6093 (3rd Cir., 2013), notes that the dispute “involves the intersection of [Kvaerner and Baumhammers],” which is the framework in which these disputes are now analyzed.
Recent Developments in 'Occurence' Case Law
August 6, 2013 | Posted In Business Litigation - Occurance Case Law | Share
