Because the Ohio Supreme Court docket mulls whether or not insurers have an obligation to indemnify Sherwin-Williams Co., after the paint maker and others had been held liable in a $409 million public nuisance case over lead paint, attorneys on either side warn of the potential broader implications of the forthcoming determination.
The Ohio Supreme Court heard oral arguments this week on attraction by sure underwriters at Lloyd’s of London after the state’s Eighth District Court docket of Appeals denied abstract judgment to the insurers. In a 2-1 majority, the state appellate court docket held that Sherwin-Williams’ industrial common legal responsibility insurance policies, which cowl “damages” for particular property and bodily harm that the insured neither anticipated nor meant, might cowl underlying public-nuisance claims introduced by California public entities.
