Almah LLC v. Lexington Ins. Co.

10 Citing cases

  1. Ashland LLC v. Samuel J. Heyman 1981 Continuing Tr.

    C.A. No. N15C-10-176 EMD CCLD (Del. Super. Ct. Mar. 29, 2017)

    Unless otherwise indicated, the following are the Relevant Facts as alleged in Plaintiffs' First Amended Complaint (the "Complaint"), Defendants' Answer and Counterclaims, and Plaintiffs' Answer. For purposes of the MJP Motion, the Court must view all well-pleaded facts alleged in the Complaint as true and in a light most favorable to Ashland. See Almah LLC v. Lexington Insurance Company, 2016 WL 369576, at *4 (Del. Super. Jan. 27, 2016) (citing Desert Equities, Inc. v. Morgan Stanley Leveraged Equity Fund, II, L.P., 624 A.2d 1199, 1205 (Del. 1993)). The disputed property (the "Linden Property") is located at 4000 Road to Grasselli, Linden, New Jersey. The Linden Property has a chemical manufacturing history. From 1919 to 1991, non-parties GAF Corporation and GAF Chemicals Corporation owned and operated the Linden Property. GAF Corporation and GAF Chemicals Corporation discovered extensive contamination at the Linden Property during the 1970s-80s.

  2. Lexington Ins. Co. v. Almah LLC

    No. 319, 2016 (Del. Jun. 28, 2016)

    Chief Justice Almah LLC v. Lexington Ins. Co., 2016 WL 369576 (Del. Super. Jan. 27, 2016), reargument denied, 2016 WL 3092687 (Del. Super. May 24, 2016).

  3. Davis v. Tristar Claims Mgmt. Servs.

    C. A. N23C-03-161 PRW CCLD (Del. Super. Ct. Feb. 29, 2024)   Cited 1 times

    Super. Ct. Civ. R. 12(c). Almah LLC v. Lexington Insurance Company, 2016 WL 369576, at *4 (Del. Super. Ct. Jan. 27, 2016) (citing Desert Equities, Inc. v. Morgan Stanley Leveraged Equity Fund, II, L.P., 624 A.2d 1199, 1205 (Del. 1993)). OSI Sys., Inc. v. Instrumentarium Corp., 892 A.2d 1086, 1090 (Del. Ch. 2006).

  4. IP Network Sols. v. Nutanix, Inc.

    C. A. N21C-04-014 PRW CCLD (Del. Super. Ct. Feb. 8, 2022)   Cited 5 times

    Super. Ct. Civ. R. 12(c).Almah LLC v. Lexington Ins. Co., 2016 WL 369576, at *4 (Del. Super. Ct. Jan. 27, 2016) (citing Desert Equities, Inc. v. Morgan Stanley Leveraged Equity Fund, II, L.P., 624 A.2d 1199, 1205 (Del. 1993)).Id.

  5. Pecan Vill. TX 2016, LP v. SW MH Holdings

    C.A. No. N20C-06-040 PRW CCLD (Del. Super. Ct. Feb. 3, 2021)   Cited 1 times

    Super. Ct. Jan. 17, 2014). Almah LLC v. Lexington Ins. Co., 2016 WL 369576, at *4 (Del. Super. Ct. Jan. 27, 2016). Desert Equities, Inc. v. Morgan Stanley Leveraged Equity Fund, II, L.P., 624 A.2d 1199, 1205 (Del. 1993).

  6. Indian Harbor Ins. Co. v. SharkNinja Operating LLC

    Civil Action No. N20C-02-014 PRW CCLD (Del. Super. Ct. Nov. 19, 2020)   Cited 7 times
    Declining to consider parties' arguments to the extent the arguments focused on contract terms separated by a disjunctive "or" after concluding one term was sufficient

    Id. See Almah LLC v. Lexington Ins. Co., 2016 WL 369576, at *4 (Del. Super. Ct. Jan. 27, 2016) ("The Court may grant a motion for judgment on the pleadings only when no material issue of fact exists and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law."); see also Anolick v. Holy Trinity Greek Orthodox Church, 787 A.2d 732, 738 (Del. Ch. 2001) (But "[t]he presence of cross-motions 'does not act per se as a concession that there is an absence of factual issues.'" (quoting United Vanguard Fund, Inc. v. TakeCare, Inc., 693 A.2d 1076, 1079 (Del. 1997))).

  7. Goggin v. Nat'l Union Fire Ins. Co. of Pittsburgh

    C.A. NO.: N17C-10-083 PRW CCLD (Del. Super. Ct. Nov. 30, 2018)   Cited 21 times   2 Legal Analyses

    Blanco v. AMVAC Chem. Corp., 2012 WL 3194412, at *6 (Del. Super. Ct. Aug. 8, 2012) (citing Ross Holding and Mgmt. Co. v. Advance Realty Group, LLC, 2010 WL 1838608, at *5 (Del. Ch. Apr. 28, 2010)). Almah LLC v. Lexington Insurance Company, 2016 WL 369576, at *4 (Del. Super. Ct. Jan. 27, 2016). Desert Equities, Inc. v. Morgan Stanley Leveraged Equity Fund, II, L.P., 624 A.2d 1199, 1205 (Del. 1993).

  8. Catlin Specialty Ins. Co. v. CBL & Assocs. Props., Inc.

    C.A. No. N16C-07-166 PRW CCLD (Del. Super. Ct. Sep. 20, 2017)   Cited 4 times
    Applying the law of the state of incorporation for the insurance policy protecting the company from a fraudulent scheme to overcharge consumers not involving a D&O policy

    Super. Ct. Civ. R. 12(c). Almah LLC v. Lexington Ins. Co., 2016 WL 369576, at *4 (Del. Super. Ct. Jan. 27, 2016) (citing Desert Equities, Inc. v. Morgan Stanley Leveraged Equity Fund, II, L.P., 624 A.2d 1199, 1205 (Del. 1993)). Id.

  9. Bedrock Leasing Corp. v. Lexington Ins. Co.

    C.A. No. N16C-08-084 EMD CCLD (Del. Super. Ct. Apr. 27, 2017)

    Id. ΒΆ 8. C.A. No. N15C-01-237 EMD, 2016 WL 369576 (Del. Super. Jan. 27, 2016). B. PROCEDURAL HISTORY

  10. Orient Overseas Assocs. v. XL Ins. Am., Inc.

    2016 N.Y. Slip Op. 31009 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 2016)   Cited 2 times
    Interpreting identical precatory language as unambiguously subjecting any "loss ... caused by flood," including losses contemplated by separate coverages, to the subject policy's "flood sublimit"

    See id. at *4. It also should be noted that the Delaware case Orient provided to the court before oral argument, Almah LLC v Lexington Ins. Co., 2016 WL 369576 (Del Super Jan. 27, 2016), not only fails to support Orient's position, but actually stands for the uncontroversial proposition that time element losses can be subject to lower sublimits, such as a flood sublimit. See id. at *6.