Keene Corp. v. Insurance Co. of North America
United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit
667 F.2d 1034 (1981)
- Written by Kheana Pollard, JD
Facts
Keene Corporation (Keene) (defendant) was a manufacturer that made a number of products containing asbestos over the span of about 20 years. As a result, Keene was named in many lawsuits. Keene was covered by multiple insurance companies during the span of the production of the products containing asbestos. Keene turned over the damage cases to these companies, but each company denied at least some scope of the responsibility. Keene sought a declaratory judgment determining the extent that each policy covered Keene’s liability. Keene argued that asbestos-related diseases triggered the insurance companies’ coverage. The Insurance Company of North America (INA) (defendant) and accompanying insurance companies argued that coverage was triggered if a bodily injury occurred during the policy period. Another company argued that coverage was triggered only if the asbestos was inhaled. The lower court held that the insurance companies should cover the costs but that Keene was liable for the costs for exposure that happened while Keene was uninsured. The case was appealed to the United State Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Bazelon, J.)
Concurrence/Dissent (Wald, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 811,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.