An appellate court in California ruled two people who protect the feral cat population at a college were not entitled to a defense under their homeowners insurance policy in a lawsuit that alleged invasion of privacy, stalking, intentional infliction of emotional distress and assault.

A federal district court ruled that an insurer was not obligated to cover claims stemming from allegedly faulty emergency-mitigation measures and repairs made to a roof damaged by Hurricane Isaac.

A Washington appeals court, affirming a trial courts decision, has decided that a case alleging road rage did not allege an accident as required for coverage under either a homeowners-insurance policy or an auto-insurance policy.

An Arizona appellate court ruled that the prohibited dog exclusion in a policy's animal-liability endorsement barred coverage for negligence claims against an insured when he failed to inform a plaintiff bitten by his pit bull whether the dog had received rabies shots.

A court in California has ruled that the state did not have a sufficient interest in a workers compensation claim filed by a professional basketball player who had played only one game in California and, therefore, it could not apply Californias workers compensation law to the players claim.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit has upheld the dismissal of a subrogation action brought by insurance companies against the entities that designed, built, operated, and maintained 7 World Trade Center in Manhattan.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit has upheld the dismissal of a subrogation action brought by insurance companies against the entities that designed, built, operated, and maintained 7 World Trade Center in Manhattan.

West Virginias highest court has ruled the term collapse as used in a homeowners insurance policy was ambiguous and meant something less than complete falling in of a kitchen floor.