The Ohio Supreme Court is debating whether insurers have a duty to indemnify Sherwin-Williams Co., after the paint maker and others were held liable in a $409 million public nuisance case over lead paint. Sheri Pastor spoke with Law.com about the 2-1 majority the state appellate court held that Sherwin-Williams’ commercial general liability policies could cover underlying public-nuisance claims brought by California public entities.
“My amici clients, who are manufacturers, are concerned about whether manufacturers will receive the tort liability insurance coverage that they paid substantial premium for and that they expected,” Sheri said. “CGL policies have always covered tort claims and public nuisance would be within that category, and CGL policies cover damages—that would include damages to remediate dangerous conditions.” She explained that “the insurers are essentially looking to narrow their coverage obligations by arguing that damages shouldn’t include those amounts.”