Zurich American Insurance Company v. Syngenta Crop Protection LLC

Summary

The Court affirmed the Superior Court’s judgment that a lawyer’s 2016 letter threatening future paraquat litigation was not a “claim for damages” under Syngenta’s claims-made policies because it identified no claimant and demanded no monetary relief. The Court also upheld the refusal to compel privileged attorney-client communications because Zurich’s discovery request related to an unappealed statutory coverage claim and was not fairly presented for appellate review. Finally, the Court affirmed summary judgment against Syngenta’s bad-faith claim because Zurich had reasonable grounds for disputing coverage when it denied the claim.