When a loss occurs to multiple locations for the same occurrence, does coverage applied per occurrence or per location?

An insurer denied a claim made under a commercial property policy based on the policy's water backup exclusion.

A church and its governing evangelical association were each found vicariously liable for injuries caused by a church employee who was acting in the scope of his employment.

An insurer disagreed with its insured about whether it had been surface water or rain water that caused water damage to the interior of the insured's home.

The manufacturer of an alcoholic energy drink argued that the liquor liability exclusion in its CGL policy didn't apply because the exclusion was inapplicable to manufacturers.

An insurer who provided both primary and excess coverage to an insured refused to pay primary coverage for an insured who was also covered by an underlying policy.

A nonprofit legal firm filed an amicus brief to support an insurer who was sued for denying coverage of the diminished value of a third-party vehicle after covering repairs to that vehicle.

An insured needed to replace part of the plumbing system under his house, but the insurer would not cover the costs associated with replacement.

Coverage for subcontractors under an additional insured endorsement comes into question when the subcontractor's employee is injured in an accident.

A restaurant owner's BOP contained a provision stating the restaurant's landlords were 'additional insureds' for claims arising out of the restaurant owner's use of the premises.