Not Named, No Coverage: Additional Insured Status Denied

more+
less-

In One Beacon Ins. Co. v. Crowley Marine Services, Inc., ___F.3d ___, 2011 WL 3195292 (5th Cir. (Tex.) July 28, 2011), the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit upheld an insurer's denial of coverage for a party not expressly named as an additional insured.

Crowley, owned and operated vessels, and Tubal-Cain repaired ships. While working on a Crowley vessel, a subcontractor for Tubal-Cain purportedly was injured and filed suit against Tubal-Cain and Crowley in Texas state court. Crowley sought a defense and indemnity from Tubal-Cain and coverage from One Beacon as an additional insured under a maritime comprehensive liability policy issued to Tubal-Cain.

Please see full newsletter below for more information.

LOADING PDF: If there are any problems, click here to download the file.

Published In: General Business Updates, Insurance Updates, Maritime Updates, Personal Injury Updates

DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.

© Sedgwick LLP | Attorney Advertising

Don't miss a thing! Build a custom news brief:

Read fresh new writing on compliance, cybersecurity, Dodd-Frank, whistleblowers, social media, hiring & firing, patent reform, the NLRB, Obamacare, the SEC…

…or whatever matters the most to you. Follow authors, firms, and topics on JD Supra.

Create your news brief now - it's free and easy »