In Newport Associates, Phase 1 Developers Limited Partnership v. Travelers Casualty and Surety Company, No. HUD-L-3070-09 ( New Jersey L. Div. January 24, 2012), plaintiff developers brought a declaratory judgment action against its comprehensive general liability and excess insurance carriers seeking indemnification for cleanup costs related to a site located in Jersey City, New Jersey. Coverage was denied based on two facts: (i) plaintiffs were not named insureds under the policies; and (ii) the excess policies contained an absolute pollution exclusion clause.
The comprehensive general liability insurer issued a policy to an affiliate of the plaintiffs (the “Insured”). The policy defined “named insured” to include entities controlled by the Insured. The plaintiffs contended that they should be included as named insureds.
The Court, in determining whether the plaintiffs were named insureds, focused on the interpretation of the term “controlled,” which was not defined in the comprehensive general liability policy. In reviewing both common law and statutes defining the concept of “control,” the Court concluded that for the plaintiffs to be named insureds, the Insured had to own an interest in the plaintiffs of 50% or more. Because the Insured owned less than 50% interest in the plaintiffs, the Court held that the plaintiffs are not named insureds under the policy.
Please see full article below for more information.
Firefox recommends the PDF Plugin for Mac OS X for viewing PDF documents in your browser.
We can also show you Legal Updates using the Google Viewer; however, you will need to be logged into Google Docs to view them.
Please choose one of the above to proceed!
LOADING PDF: If there are any problems, click here to download the file.