Insurance coverage litigation isn’t what it used to be. In this episode of the Emerging Litigation Podcast, Jeremy Moseley of Spencer Fane unpacks how automation, AI, climate change, and “social inflation” are reshaping risks and fueling high-stakes disputes. From thermonuclear verdicts to dangerous policy gaps, Jeremy offers sharp, practical insights into what insurers, policyholders, and lawyers should expect next.
The world’s leaders still don’t agree on what, if anything, to do about climate change – despite mounting evidence that, as a planet, we are in the soup. A major ruling from the International Court of Justice says states have an obligation to save the planet, as the U.S. president is enthusiastically sprinting the other way, inspiring cheers from his base and jeers from scientists. As for domestic litigation designed to pin liability on the fossil fuel industry, a case in South Carolina faltered as another in Hawaii is clearing hurdles. Read the update from Tom Hagy.
Bret Thurman provides an in-depth look at the surge of legal actions stemming from the catastrophic 2025 California wildfires, which caused widespread destruction across Southern California. He explores the numerous lawsuits filed against major utility companies like Southern California Edison (SCE) and the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power (LADWP), as well as actions against landlords accused of price gouging in the wake of the disaster. Key legal theories include negligence, inverse condemnation, and public nuisance, with plaintiffs arguing that mismanagement, delayed responses, and regulatory failures significantly contributed to the scale of the devastation. These cases could set important legal precedents for disaster liability and corporate accountability in California and beyond.
Tim Zyla examines the high-stakes legal battle between New York and a coalition of 22 states, led by West Virginia, over the state’s newly enacted Climate Change Superfund Act. The law requires energy producers to pay $75 billion over 25 years to fund climate damage recovery efforts. The lawsuit, filed in federal court, argues that New York’s law is unconstitutional, overreaches state authority, and unfairly targets out-of-state energy companies. Plaintiffs claim the Act violates multiple constitutional provisions, including the Commerce Clause, Due Process, and Equal Protection Clauses, as well as federal environmental law. Meanwhile, a pro se West Virginia resident has filed a motion to dismiss the case, defending New York’s actions as necessary for public health and climate accountability. Zyla highlights how this case could set a major precedent for state-level climate initiatives and corporate liability for environmental damage.
In this CLE webinar, Anderson Kill attorneys, Dennis J. Artese, Ethan Middlebrooks, and Thomas Dupont and professional engineer, Kenneth R. Quigley discuss permutations of policy language and state law that may affect coverage for damage caused by underground climate change, including how state law treats anti-concurrent causation clauses, whether “human-caused” exceptions to earth movement exclusions may apply to underground climate change, and whether “abrupt collapse” exceptions to exclusions for building collapse may apply when undetected structural damage triggered by underground climate change triggers collapse.
Studies have shown that “underground climate change” is affecting ground soil conditions, causing structural strains on buildings and exacerbating cracks and defects in walls and foundations. The authors, Dennis Artese, Ethan Middlebrooks, and Thomas Dupont analyze permutations of policy language and state law that may affect coverage for damage caused by underground climate change, including how state law treats anti-concurrent causation clauses, whether “human-caused” exceptions to earth movement exclusions may apply to underground climate change, and whether “abrupt collapse” exceptions to exclusions for building collapse may apply when undetected structural damage triggered by underground climate change triggers collapse. As the authors note, "there are numerous arguments in favor of coverage under all-risk property insurance policies for losses related to underground climate change".
The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals recently struck down Berkeley, California's ban on natural gas infrastructure in new buildings as a violation of federal law. As we will continue to see more such bans, our guest shares insights on how similar cases may be treated -- and much more.
The Author Victoria Kline (linkedin.com/in/victoria-kline) just graduated from the University of Miami School of Law, and is an incoming associate at Jones Day. She focused her studies on environmental law, which also will be her area of practice. (Congratulations to Victoria on her graduation and getting her start at Reed Smith!) Interviews with leading attorneys and other subject matter experts on new twists in the law and how the law is responding to new twists in the world. Climate Change, Property Rights, and Conservation: Highlights from a Decade of Environmental Law (2013–2023) Abstract: The author discusses nine recent decisions—all but one handed down by the Supreme Court—that demonstrate the ongoing debate over responsibility for the effects of climate change, how the courts are essentially asked to strike a balance between environmental protection and economic development, the intersection of property rights and conservation, and how litigants fared with their arguments over different aspects of this important and, many would say, existential dilemma. The author concludes with an update from the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change and the establishment of a loss and damage fund for countries harmed by climate change. "The past decade has seen numerous legal challenges and landmark rulings in environmental law, reflecting the growing recognition of the critical [...]
Guest Writer Victoria is a third-year student at the University of Miami School of Law, Juris Doctorate Candidate 2023, Law Review Staff Editor, and soon-to-be associate at Jones Day. European Court of Human Rights to Hear Case on Climate Change By Victoria Kline The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) is hearing a landmark case brought forward by the Senior Women for Climate Protection Switzerland, who are suing the Swiss government (the “State”) for human rights violations related to climate change. Verein KlimaSeniorinnen Schweiz and others v. Switzerland (“KlimaSeniorinnen”) is one of the first climate change matters the court has taken up. On Wednesday, March 29, 2023, the ECHR held a public hearing. History of the Case KlimaSeniorinnen began back in 2016, ignited by a group of women called KlimaSeniorinnen Schweiz, the Senior Women for Climate Protection Switzerland. The group filed suit in Swiss court against a variety of Swiss federal government bodies alleging violations of obligations set forth in the Swiss Constitution and the European Convention on Human Rights (the “Convention”). The heart of the suit is the State’s shortcomings in progress being made towards the adopted Paris Agreement’s goal to keep “the increase in the global average temperature to well below 2°C above pre-industrial levels.” The elderly plaintiffs purport that their demographic is especially [...]
Environmentalists Argue Federal Government Failed to Analyze Social Costs of Fossil Fuel Emissions from Drilling Leases “Federal public lands used for fossil fuel extraction contribute 24% of the United States’ Greenhouse Emissions,” according to 10 environmental groups in their ongoing lawsuit against the U.S. Department of the Interior, Secretary of the Interior Debra Haaland, the Bureau of Land Management (BoLM), and BoLM Director Tracy Stone-Manning (Dakota Resource or Council, et al, v. U.S. Department of the Interior, et al., D. D.C., No. 1:22-cv-1853 ). Their lawsuit seeks to invalidate 173 oil and gas leases approved in June 2022 across eight states: Colorado, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, North Dakota, Oklahoma, and Utah, and Wyoming. Plaintiffs include: Dakota Resource Center, Center for Biological Diversity, Citizens for a Healthy Community, Living Rivers & Colorado Riverkeeper, Montana Environmental Information Center, Rio Grande Waterkeeper, Sierra Club, Waterkeeper Alliance, Western Waterheads Project, and WildEarth Guardians. The environmental groups argue the BoLM is in violation of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) 42 U.S.C. § 4321, for failing to make efforts to prevent or eliminate damage to the environment and biosphere. The groups also argue that Secretary Haaland failed to follow the instructions of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act (FLPMA) 43 U.S.C. § 1701, which requires her office to “take any action necessary to prevent [...]
Willow II: Conservation Groups Sue Again to Stop Oil Project in Alaska’s Western Arctic Several conservation groups filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Alaska against the federal government in another effort to halt the Willow Master Development Plan (Willow Oil Project), a proposed oil and gas development in Alaska’s Western Arctic. Spearheading the development is ConocoPhillips Alaska Incorporated. The project was approved for a second time by the Biden Administration only a day before the filing of the plaintiffs’ complaint. The Willow Oil Project The Willow Oil Project is a multi-billion dollar project that would involve the construction of drilling pads, pipelines, and other infrastructure in the National Petroleum Reserve-Alaska (Reserve). The project involves drilling up to 250 wells for the purpose of generating 586 million barrels of oil within its 30-year lifespan. As a direct result of the activity, roughly 258 million metric tons of greenhouse gas emissions would be released into the atmosphere. The project has been controversial due to concerns over its potential impacts on the environment and wildlife in the area. Willow II Case History ConocoPhillips first proposed the Willow Oil Project to the Bureau of Land Management (BoLM) in May of 2018. After determining that the project was a major federally-involved action that would significantly affect the [...]
Strategies for Maximizing Insurance Recovery for Climate Change–Related Loss and Damage Abstract Losses from natural catastrophes are costing many tens of billions as year, from hurricanes and tornadoes to record-breaking rainfall and floods. Whether the insurance industry will or can provide coverage for all of the devastating effects of climate change (or, as some might put it, a new and calamitous phase in our earth’s existence) only time will tell. In the meantime, policyholders must cross their Ts if they expect coverage. In this article the author shares insights on the complex but essential task of documenting and valuing post-storm losses. Author Dennis J. Artese (dartese@andersonkill.com) is a shareholder in the New York office of Anderson Kill P.C. His practice concentrates on insurance recovery litigation, with an emphasis on securing insurance coverage for first-party property losses, construction accidents, and third-party liability claims. About The Journal on Emerging Issues in Litigation is a co-production of HB, Fastcase, and Law Street Media. You can also hear the complementary (and complimentary) Emerging Litigation Podcast wherever podcasts appear. For questions, contact Tom Hagy, Editor in Chief, at Editor@LitigationConferences.com.
