A Travelers subsidiary has no obligation to defend a construction company against a suit seeking indemnification for asbestos-related injury claims, a South Carolina federal court ruled, finding that the suit does not meet the necessary legal standards for indemnity under the insurance policy. The court determined that the construction company's claims for asbestos-related injuries were not directly tied to the actions of the insurer, and therefore, Travelers is not liable for defense or indemnification. The decision underscores the importance of clear contractual obligations and the limitations of insurance coverage in cases involving third-party claims. The case was filed on October 4, 2024, in South Carolina federal court, and centers on the nature of insurance liability in construction-related injury disputes. The ruling may influence future insurance indemnification claims in similar construction contexts.

Travelers Units Freed From Builder's Asbestos Injury Dispute

A South Carolina federal court ruled that a Travelers subsidiary has no obligation to defend a construction company against a suit seeking indemnification for asbestos-related injury claims, as the suit does not meet the legal standards for indemnity under the insurance policy. The court found that the construction company's claims were not directly tied to the insurer's actions, and thus Travelers is not liable for defense or indemnification. The case, filed on October 4, 2024, highlights the importance of clear contractual obligations and the limitations of insurance coverage in construction-related injury disputes, and may influence future indemnification claims in similar contexts.