In Greystone Const., Inc. v. National Fire & Marine Ins. Co., 649 F.Supp. 2d 1213 (D. Colo. 2009), a contractor and one of its insurers brought an action against a second insurer after the second insurer refused to fund the contractor’s defense in construction defect actions brought by homeowners.
This case emphasizes the need to be especially diligent and thorough when drafting complaints in construction defect matters. Additionally, the Greystone case makes clear that general allegations of “consequential damages” without specific explanation as to the nature of such damages, may fail to trigger insurance coverage and therefore an insurance carrier’s duty to defend or to indemnify.
In its recent decision in Mid-Century Insurance Co. v. HIVE Construction, Inc., 2025 CO 17,…
In the intricate world of construction, builders often rely heavily on insurance brokers to secure…
On March 28, 2025, the Colorado House passed House Bill 25-1272 on second reading with…
In the recent Colorado Court of Appeals decision Stoecklein v. Fayette Farms, LLC (2024 WL…
Over the years, plaintiff’s attorneys have steadily attempted to chip away at the guardrails that…
For years, Colorado’s economic loss rule has not applied to residential construction and has not…