Class Actions for Separate Tenant Fees Are Not “Related Claims”
The United States District Court for the District of Colorado, applying Colorado law, has held that two tenant class actions alleging distinct improper fee practices at an apartment complex do not constitute “related claims” subject to a single limit of liability. Cardinal Group Mgmt. & Advisory, LLC v. QBE Ins. Corp., 2026 WL 1831276 (D. Colo. May 12, 2026).
The insured property manager sought coverage for two underlying lawsuits under claims-made commercial liability policies. The first lawsuit, filed during the 2021–2022 policy period, alleged that the insured failed to maintain properties in an apartment complex in a habitable condition and improperly charged tenants move-out and administrative fees. The second lawsuit, filed during the 2023–2024 policy period, alleged that the insured failed to adequately disclose trash and property tax fees charged to tenants at the same apartment complex. The insured sought a declaratory judgment that the lawsuits were not “related claims” subject to a single policy limit of liability. The policies defined “related claims” as claims “based upon, arising out of or resulting from the same or related, or having a common nexus of, facts, circumstances or Wrongful Acts.”
The court denied the insurer’s motion for judgment on the pleadings, determining that the lawsuits did not constitute “related claims.” The court reasoned that although both lawsuits involved allegations against the same property manager and the same apartment complex during roughly the same time period, the proposed plaintiff class, the challenged fees, the legal claims, and the factual bases for those claims differed between the lawsuits. The court also noted that one of the lawsuits included allegations related to habitability that were absent from the other lawsuit. The court concluded that the similarities between the lawsuits fell short of the factual overlap necessary to demonstrate a “common nexus” between the claims, and thus each lawsuit was subject to a separate limit of liability.
