PART II: Courts struggle with Whether Global Warming is “Natural and Probable”
October 27, 2011 by Collins & Lacy, P.C.
Last time, we discussed The AES Corporation v. Steadfast Insurance Company, a recent Virginia case where the growing trend of climate change nuisance cases intersected with the world of insurance coverage law. Critical to the coverage analysis was whether the Plaintiffs in the underlying action, the tiny island village of Kivalina, Alaska, alleged an accident or occurrence, which the Court defined as something that is not the natural or probable consequence of the insured’s actions.
- The Virginia definition says an “accident” is a result that is not natural and probable.
- South Carolina defines an “accident” as a result that is unexpected and occurs by chance.
Is it two ways of saying the same thing? How might this case have played out in an Palmetto State court?

About Collins & Lacy, P.C.
Collins & Lacy is a statewide business defense firm in South Carolina relentlessly focused on the client experience by delivering unwavering legal representation through solid preparation, consistent execution, and client-oriented service aimed at success. The firm represents local, regional and national clients in the areas of construction, corporate and business law, retail/hospitality, insurance/bad faith, products liability, professional liability, commercial transportation, and workers’ compensation.