Reading time: 6 minutes

Here's your Friday Five:

Every week our team rips through 200+ insurance, legal, regulatory, and market-risk articles so you don't have to!

🎧 Listen to this week's edition

Special edition this week. We gave the full review hour to a single book timed for the semi-quincentennial: America 250: The History of Insurance and Insurance Coverage Law and Litigation in the United States, by Scott Seaman, Pedro Hernandez, and Peter Lewis of Hinshaw & Culbertson. America turns 250 on July 4. The book makes the case our industry deserves a seat at the birthday table. We agree.

Three threads worth your time:

• Marine insurers funded the Revolution when the colonies had no navy and no central bank. The industry our readers run is older than the country. It has the receipts.

• Every trigger, allocation, and exclusion fight your claims team argued last quarter traces to asbestos courtrooms in the 1980s. The same rules now govern cyber, PFAS, and AI. Nothing has changed except the substrate.

• Praedicat estimates U.S. PFAS water cleanup alone could exceed $400 billion for insurers. Before product liability. Before bodily injury. Before D&O. The clock that took asbestos thirty years is running at double speed.

---

Nobody Will Mention Insurance on July 4. Your Board Should.

Summary

Benjamin Franklin co-founded the Philadelphia Contributionship in 1752. One of the first fire insurance companies in America.

Franklin also signed the Declaration of Independence, the Treaty of Paris, and the Constitution. He was 81 at the Constitutional Convention. He invented bifocals, the lightning rod, and the volunteer fire department. But he was not the only link between insurance and the founding. During the Revolutionary War, marine insurers took on the financial risk of independence. They insured trade routes when the colonies had no navy and no central bank.

State-chartered insurance companies bought American debt, helped borrow from abroad, and backed early banking.

The industry held over $8.98 trillion in cash and invested assets at year-end 2024. Insurer capital is in the Hoover Dam, the Golden Gate Bridge, and the St. Lawrence Seaway. The book says it plainly: without insurance, the range of products and services in this country would shrink.

So what?

July 4 coverage will feature the military, the founders, and the flag. It will not feature the industry that made commercial risk possible.

That gap matters to every carrier executive heading into summer renewals.

Pull this thread into your next board meeting. A 90-second opener on the 250-year history of what insurers funded reframes the room. Insurance stops being a line item and starts being an infrastructure story. That framing changes how boards talk about pricing, capacity, and appetite for the rest of the meeting.

---

Three Rules Written in Asbestos Courtrooms Still Govern Your Next Renewal.

Summary

The golden ages of the insurance coverage wars started in the 1980s with asbestos and environmental long-tail claims. Hinshaw's authors argue those wars never stopped.

Before the 1980s, coverage fights were rare. Most disputes were simple and settled fast. Asbestos changed that. Environmental changed that. Claims spanned many policy years, pulled in dozens of insurers, and produced billions in losses. The cases drew top law firms and created a body of case law that today governs nearly every coverage dispute in the country. The book traces the form revisions through each crisis. The 1966 CGL form. The 1973 form. The 1986 revisions.

Each round followed a round of court losses.

Policyholders won cases under existing language. Insurers rewrote the forms. The "sudden and accidental" pollution exclusion of the 1970s became the "absolute" pollution exclusion in 1986 after years of split court rulings. That cycle has never stopped. The authors press another point that does not get aired enough.

Most commercial policies are form policies written by the Insurance Services Office, owned by public shareholders through Verisk Analytics. Brokers draft or negotiate manuscript policies for their clients. State regulators review and approve forms. The idea behind contra proferentem (the rule that reads unclear policy language against the insurer) rarely holds in commercial deals where both sides had lawyers at the table.

The LION Lens

What happened — Hinshaw's book documents how asbestos and environmental long-tail claims produced the trigger, allocation, and exhaustion rules now being argued in cyber, PFAS, AI, and privacy coverage disputes (source: America 250, Seaman, Hernandez, and Lewis, Hinshaw & Culbertson).

Why it matters — Carriers writing cyber, professional liability, and D&O programs in 2026 are working under rules written in asbestos courtrooms in the 1980s. The policy language changed. The framework did not.

Practical implications — Insurers that trace their form language back to the case law that produced each change can write forward. Those working from inherited forms inherit the gaps along with the words.

So what?

Three rules from the long-tail era show up in renewal talks this quarter.

Trigger. The asbestos question was when bodily injury "occurred" across a long exposure. The cyber version is when data theft triggers coverage: at theft, at discovery, or at formal claim. Different facts. Same framework.

Allocation. Pro rata versus all sums (how losses get split across policy years). Asbestos policyholders pushed for all sums to pull in every policy year. PFAS policyholders are running the same play today. Most courts have adopted pro rata, but the fight is alive in every new mass tort wave.

Exclusion wording. The "sudden and accidental" phrase failed because courts split on whether "sudden" required a time element. Insurers replaced it with "absolute" pollution exclusions. That same pressure is now visible in silent cyber, AI liability, and biometric data exclusions. Where the wording is unclear, plaintiff counsel knows the playbook. CiCi Enterprises v. HSB Specialty Insurance (N.D. Tex., Feb. 2026) proved the point in real time: a ransomware sublimit endorsement that failed to cross-reference the insuring agreement it was supposed to modify was invalidated, and the court let bad faith claims proceed against both the carrier and its MGA. Same architecture. Same risk. Different substrate.

One caveat the Hinshaw authors underscore: outcomes on trigger, allocation, and exclusion scope vary by state. New Jersey, California, and Washington have been more receptive to pro-policyholder arguments than Texas, Illinois, and Delaware. Governing law matters as much as wording.

The LION POV

Here's how we're advising clients:

• Read your exclusions against the case law that made them. If your cyber or AI exclusion traces to language written before the relevant coverage fights were decided, you are carrying forward risk that newer wording would fix.
• Assume PFAS, AI, and privacy will follow the asbestos playbook on allocation. Pro rata versus all sums will be the first big fight. Structure your policy tower to address allocation in the contract language, reducing the risk that a court decides the question for you.
• Consider the Lloyd's manuscript program for emerging risks, where your program structure allows it. Our 40-page form was designed to avoid inheriting standard-form gaps on risks that did not exist when the ISO forms were written. For MGAs operating under delegated authority, the parallel action is auditing your sublimit endorsements against the insuring agreements they claim to modify. CiCi showed what happens when that audit doesn't happen. The Hinshaw book explains why.

The carriers reading case history before renewal season are the carriers drafting better contracts during it.

Want to map long-tail doctrine against your current portfolio? Contact LION Specialty for a confidential coverage and wording review.

---

$400 Billion in PFAS. AI Moving at Five Times the Speed. The Cases Are Filed.

Summary

Praedicat estimates U.S. cleanup costs for PFAS-contaminated water alone could exceed $400 billion for insurers. That number does not include product liability, personal injury, or D&O suits.

The comparison to asbestos has limits. Legacy policies from the asbestos era are often lost, settled, or impaired. Newer policies carry claims-made structures, tighter exclusions, and defenses that were not available forty years ago. But the forces pushing losses higher are also stronger. Social inflation is real. Plaintiff bar resources are larger. Reptilian trial strategies did not exist in the early asbestos era. AI presents a separate and possibly faster risk cycle. Carriers deploy AI across underwriting, claims, and fraud detection. Policyholder lawyers are targeting that deployment in bad faith suits. The NAIC issued a request for information in May 2025 on a model law for insurer use of AI. The Hinshaw authors flag the regulatory momentum but note that the ultimate cost to the industry will depend on factors that remain unknown.

If PFAS losses flow through ceded programs, the reinsurance and retrocession impact will follow. ILS investors holding positions with multi-year tails should note that compressed loss curves change the reserving math on their side of the deal as well.

So what?

Asbestos ran roughly thirty years from first wave of litigation to peak coverage activity. Current trajectories suggest PFAS could compress that to fifteen. AI-related disputes could move faster still, possibly to five years or less.

The cases are already here. In Lokken v. UnitedHealth Group (D. Minn. 2025), a federal court let breach of contract and implied covenant of good faith claims survive against an insurer that used AI to make coverage calls without telling policyholders. Most state-law claims were preempted by the Medicare Act, but the contract-based theories got through, and the court has since ordered broad discovery into UnitedHealth's AI systems. Barrows v. Humana (W.D. Ky. 2025) went further, allowing unjust enrichment, breach of contract, and fraud claims to proceed based on Humana's use of an AI model to deny post-acute care while collecting premiums. The through-line: policyholders paid for human judgment and got algorithmic output. Courts are treating that gap as actionable.

The P&C wave is building. Huskey v. State Farm Fire & Casualty (N.D. Ill., filed Dec. 2022, still active) alleges algorithm-driven claims processing targeted Black homeowners for extra scrutiny. AI is also being used on offense: plaintiff firms deploy it to source class members, find defendants, and draft complaints faster than most carrier response teams can react.

The NAIC's focus areas for the model law are fairness in underwriting, transparency in claims, and accountability for outcomes. Regulators in New York, Colorado, and California have already expanded oversight. A model law could create new compliance duties within 12 to 18 months.

The planning implication is direct. Carriers writing 2026 programs need to reserve and draft for disputes that will land in 2031. Not 2046. Most underwriting models do not assume that timeline.

For boards and risk committees, three governance actions follow:

• Review reserve assumptions against a shorter loss development curve for PFAS and AI-related lines.
• Add PFAS and AI to the enterprise risk register if they are not there already.
• Request a coverage program audit that tests current wording against the fights that are already on the docket.

(source: America 250, Seaman, Hernandez, and Lewis, Hinshaw & Culbertson)

---

The Bottom Line

The industry our readers run helped fund the founding of the country, shaped modern coverage law in the long-tail wars, and is now entering the next era of coverage disputes on a faster clock. America 250 is the right week to remember the first point, audit your portfolio against the second, and reserve and write for the third.

---

P.S. Two reads for the weekend. First, the Hinshaw book. America 250: The History of Insurance and Insurance Coverage Law and Litigation in the United States by Scott Seaman, Pedro Hernandez, and Peter Lewis. Best single-volume treatment of the industry's history we have come across. If you are a carrier executive, general counsel, or risk officer, it belongs on your shelf before July 4.

Second, our D&O Contract Vigilance Blueprint. Five-day email course built for the executives who read this Brief:

• Secure better D&O insurance: Learn how to avoid common policy mistakes
• Protect your personal assets: Understand your potential liability

Comment BLUEPRINT and we'll send it to you.

Don't wait until a claim hits to find out your institution is under-protected.

P.S.S. This edition references court decisions, allocation methods, regulatory developments, and bankruptcy procedure. Nothing herein constitutes legal advice. Consult qualified counsel for application to your specific facts and policies.

---

Thank you for reading today's edition!

Want to share this edition via text, email or social media? Simply copy and paste the link below:

https://lionspecialty.kit.com/posts/america-is-turning-250-the-industry-that-underwrote-a-nation

And if this briefing was forwarded to you, subscribe directly here.

Stay Covered Out There Y'all,

FLIP
Founder and Managing Partner
LION Specialty