See the full video at https://youtu.be/0hS8OhnATME  The Fortuity doctrine derives from the basic concept on which insurance is based: that the insurance covers risks, not losses that were planned, intended or expected of the insured. It has always been the insurers' view that losses that the insured expected could not be insured. Doing so would have a counterproductive effect. No one would buy insurance until they were sure they would have a loss. The concept of spreading the risk on which insurance is based would be defeated. The creation of losses would be encouraged.
An accident or event is never present when the insured performs an intentional act unless further, unexpected, independent and unforeseen events occur that cause the damage. When the damage was caused by the insured's manufacture and sale of products, the manufacture and sale of products was without proper intentional and intentional acts, and there were no further, unexpected, independent and unforeseen events that caused the alleged breach of the plaintiff or liability. The court concluded that the conduct giving rise to the underlying measure was not an 'accident' or an 'event' within the coverage provision. Since there was no potential basis for coverage, there is no obligation to defend.
The rule of loss in progress encodes a basic principle of insurance law that an insurance company cannot insure against a loss that is known or obvious to the insured. (See Bartholomew v Appalachian Ins. Co . (1st 1981) 655 F.2d 27, 28-29.) The public order is based on the view of holding the insurer liable for a progressive and continuous loss of property that was discovered before the carrier insured the risk would be to impose on the insurer a guarantee for the good quality of the insured property, which liability under the insurance had not assumed. ( Greene v. Cheetham (2d Cir. 1961) 293 F.2d 933, 937.)
I Montrose Chemical Corp. against Admiral Ins. Co. (1995) 10 Cal.4th 645, 691, 693 where the occurrence and extent of damages were unknown from the insured's "point of view", coverage of continuous or progressive deterioration of property damage under a CGL policy did not offend the loss in the rule of progress.
The doctrine of fortune or the "loss in progress" rule, where damage began to occur before the insurance was established, requires that, by law, no part of the loss can be insured against. The Fortuity doctrine only prevents one party from insuring against a loss that has occurred or is certain to occur within the time of politics.
© 2020 – Barry Zalma
Barry Zalma, Esq., CFE, now limits his practice to working as an insurance consultant specializing in insurance coverage, insurance claims handling, cheating and insurance fraudsters almost equally for insurers and insurers . He also acts as an arbitrator or mediator for insurance-related disputes. He practiced law in California for more than 44 years as an insurance coverage and claims lawyer and more than 52 years in the insurance business. He is available at http://www.zalma.com and firstname.lastname@example.org.
Mr. Zalma is the first recipient of the first annual Claims Magazine / ACE Legend Award.
For the past 52 years, Barry Zalma has devoted his life to insurance, insurance claims and the need to defeat insurance fraud. He has created the following library of books and other materials to enable insurers and their claims staff to become professionals in insurance claims.
Go to Barry Zalma videos on Rumble.com at https://rumble.com/c/ c-262921
Read posts from Barry Zalma at https://parler.com/profile/Zalma / posts
Go to Barry Zalma on YouTube- https: // www. youtube.com/channel/UCysiZklEtxZsSF9DfC0Expg/
Go to the insurance claims library – https://zalma.com/blog/insurance-claims-library/
to e-mail by ZIFL, it's free! –
Read the last two issues of ZIFL here. https://zalma.com/zalmas-insurance-fraud-letter-2/ Px19459011]  Go to the Barry Zalma, Inc. website here https://www.zalma.com/
Listen to my podcast, Zalma on Insurance, on: