Litigation over the 'total' or 'absolute' pollution exclusion has grown over the past several years. The exclusion typically precludes coverage for any claims resulting from 'actual or threatened discharge, dispersal or release of any Pollutant.'
The Applicability of the Absolute Pollution Exclusion to Welding Fumes Claims
Litigants and courts are struggling with whether the polution exclusion encompasses "non-traditional" claims that, on their face, would appear to fall within the exclusion's definitions, <i>e.g.</i>, lead paint, carbon monoxide poisoning, and other toxic exposure claims. This article first describes the split among the courts on this issue and then looks at the question in the specific sub-context of welding fumes claims.
By
Jennifer R. Devery And Margot L. GreenThis premium content is locked for LawJournalNewsletters subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN LawJournalNewsletters
- Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
- Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
- Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts
Already have an account? Sign In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate access, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or call 1-877-256-2473.
