Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 20 MARCH 2019

Self-Insured Retentions Are Not A Windfall For Excess Insurers Looking To Avoid Coverage

At trial, the excess insurers prevailed.

United StatesLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration

In Deere & Co. v. Allstate Ins. Co., 2019 WL 912151 (Cal. Ct. App. Feb. 25, 2019), a California Court of Appeal recently held that an insured's self-insured retention (SIR)1 was considered part of the underlying limit of liability such that it need not be satisfied again and again just to access excess insurance policies. This case represents another example of the California appellate courts shooting down an insurance company's attempt to overreach. Nonetheless, insurance companies will continue to look for ways to avoid providing the coverage they contracted to provide, and policyholders must always be vigilant.

This particular dispute arose over insurance coverage for several asbestos personal injury claims made against manufacturer Deere & Company arising from products it manufactured from 1958 to 1986. During that period, Deere had coverage in place via a series of first-layer umbrella policies2 for personal injury claims; several layers of excess insurance

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

This article is presented for informational purposes only and is not intended to constitute legal advice.

See more popular content from