The Evolution of the Your Work Exclusion and Strategies for Keeping Your Subrogation Recovery Out of Its Grasp

Similar documents
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT. No

CONSTRUCTION DEFECTS INSURANCE COVERAGE ISSUES

TWENTY FIFTH ANNUAL NORTHEAST SURETY AND FIDELITY CLAIMS CONFERENCE SEPTEMBER 17th - 19th, 2014

Construction Defect Coverage: Emerging Issues

Builder's Risk Coverage for Construction Defects and Accidents Caused by Defective Workmanship

THE 24TH ANNUAL INSURANCE SYMPOSIUM: ALLOCATION & OTHER INSURANCE ROBERT J. WITMEYER & KATYA G. LONG

Sharing the Misery: Defects with Construction Defect Coverage

S10G0521. AMERICAN EMPIRE SURPLUS LINES INSURANCE COMPANY v. HATHAWAY DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, INC.

COVERING DEFECTIVE CONSTRUCTIONS OF CONSTRUCTION DEFECT COVERAGE

2009 CONSTRUCTION LAW UPDATE

Full Circle Regression: The New ISO "Your Work"

Construction Insurance 2018 Construction Certification Review Course. Christopher Mueller Taylor, Day, Grimm & Boyd

THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA In The Supreme Court

Wrap Insurance for Construction Projects Understanding Scope of Coverage and Resolving Coverage and Indemnification Disputes

Insurance Coverage for Employment Practices Claims/Suits

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION

NO SUPREME COURT OF ALABAMA. OWNERS INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellant, vs. JIM CARR HOMEBUILDER, LLC, PAT JOHNSON, THOMAS JOHNSON, Appellees.

THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA In The Court of Appeals. Liberty Mutual Fire Insurance Co., Respondent. Appellate Case No

Tarron L. Gartner-Ilai Cooper & Scully, PC 900 Jackson Street Suite 200 Dallas, Texas (214)

Insurance Coverage for Property Damage Caused by Defective Workmanship

IN COURT OF APPEALS. DECISION DATED AND FILED April 16, Appeal No. 2012AP1260 DISTRICT III KONRAD MARINE, INC., PLAINTIFF,

Industrial Systems, Inc. and Amako Resort Construction (U.S.), Inc., JUDGMENT AFFIRMED

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS

ALL SUMS VERSUS PRO RATA ALLOCATION, TERMINOLOGY, AND A LOOK AHEAD Audiocast

Case 1:07-cv RBK-JS Document 28 Filed 09/10/2008 Page 1 of 9. (Not for Publication) (Docket Entry Nos. 17, 24)

Insurance Coverage Law Update: The Recent Cases You Need to Know

Recent Developments in Construction Coverage

TRENDS IN ADDITIONAL INSURED COVERAGE

Case 3:14-cv WWE Document 96 Filed 04/06/17 Page 1 of 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT

2016 Construction Law Seminar

[DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT. No D.C. Docket No: 0:11-cv JIC.

Insurance Coverage for Rip & Tear Costs

The Insurer s Duty to Defend After Swagger

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION. Plaintiff, Defendant.

Which Contractors Will Be Covered By Their CGL Insurance Policies For Liability Arising Out Of Chinese Drywall? Stephen R.

Deductibles and SIRs:

The Construction Defect Case: Litigating the Defect or Litigating To Coverage THE THRESHOLD OCCURRENCE ISSUE WHERE WE ARE TODAY

Recent Trends in California Indemnity and Additional Insured Law Impacting Construction Disputes

CASE NO. SC U.S.C.A. CASE NO IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA AUTO OWNERS INSURANCE, vs. POZZI WINDOW COMPANY, ET AL.

CGL Coverage and the Myth of L-J v. Bituminous Fire & Marine Ins. Company

State By State Survey:

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Memorandum Opinion and Order

Coverage for Contractual Risk Transfer and Additional Insured Issues

What's the Deal? Additional Insured and Other Insurance Provisions

PROGRESSIVE NORTHERN INSURANCE COMPANY. ARGONAUT INSURANCE COMPANY & a. Argued: February 16, 2011 Opinion Issued: April 26, 2011

Dichotomizing CGL Coverage for Construction Defects

The Ever Changing Duty to Defend and. How It s Currently Leading to Bad faith

Sifting for Coverage: Attorney Fee-Shifting Awards

State of New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division Third Judicial Department

CLAIMS LAW UPDATE AEI CLAIMS LAW QUIZ. American Educational Institute, Inc. INTERPRETING THE ABSOLUTE POLLUTION EXCLUSION

Spiked: Could the Viking Pump Decision By the New York Court of Appeals Signal a Broader Trend on Long Tail Coverage Issues Nationwide

Burden Of Proof Issues In Consent Judgments

Case: 1:15-cv Document #: 34 Filed: 10/18/16 Page 1 of 6 PageID #:654

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS

STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS

SURETY TODAY PRESENTATION Given by Michael A. Stover Wright, Constable & Skeen, LLP Baltimore, MD September 11, 2017

RECENT DEVELOPMENTS IN CONSTRUCTION COVERAGE

Clifford J. Shapiro Partner and Chair of the Construction Law Practice Group Barnes & Thornburg LLP Chicago, Illinois

Wrap Insurance for Construction Projects

United States Court of Appeals

PLDF SEPTEMBER 2017 ANNUAL CONVENTION LEGAL UPDATES

Quincy Mutual Fire Insurance C v. Imperium Insurance Co

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TENNESSEE AT KNOXVILLE

The Greystone Construction Inc. v. National Fire & Marine

Construction Property Damage Claims: CGL Exclusions K, L and M, and Products-Completed Operations Coverage

STOWERS UPDATE HANDLING EARLY STOWERS DEMANDS

Supreme Court of Florida

Richard B. Friedman McKenna Long & Aldridge LLP, New York, New York. David G. Jordan Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C., Hamden, Connecticut

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS

SURVEY OF THE CONSTRUCTION DEFECT LANDSCAPE

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION : : : : : : : : : : : ORDER

INSIDE THIS EDITION: Coverage for Destruction in Construction Defect Claims? Coverage For Destruction But Not Construction?

ADDITIONAL INSURED COVERAGE

Insurance and Contractual Indemnification: Reconciling Competing Indemnity Obligations With Insurance Coverage

TWO AUTOMOBILES INSURED UNDER FAMILY POLICY DOUBLES STATED MEDICAL PAYMENTS COVERAGE LIMIT OF LIABILITY

BROWN BAG LUNCHEON: INSURANCE PRODUCTS, POLICY ANALYSIS, AND THE DUTY TO DEFEND

In General Security Indemnity Co. of Arizona v. Mountain States

THE RULES OF INSURANCE POLICY EXHAUSTION. By Mary E. Borja, Partner, Wiley Rein LLP

TRENTON AGRI PRODUCTS LLC INSURANCE & INDEMNIFICATION TERMS & CONDITIONS

Builders Risk. David G. Jordan November 20, 2009

Tornadoes and Thunderstorms. Tornadoes and Thunderstorms. Kevin Hromas JD, EGA, RPA, CPIU, PLCS, WIND Umpire/Appraiser

INSURING THE RISK OF CONSTRUCTION DEFECTS IN COLORADO: THE TENTH CIRCUIT S GREYSTONE DECISION

Anderson Brothers, Inc. v. St. Paul Fire and Marine Insurance Co.

DEFECTIVE CONSTRUCTION CLAIMS: WHY DO ILLINOIS COURTS TREAT CONSTRUCTION COMPANIES LIKE CRIMINALS?

Does Faulty Workmanship Constitute An Occurrence? Anita Jahanban, Associate

MIDCONSTRUCTION LOSSES

NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION

Life Insurance Summary of State Exemptions 1 for Cash Value 2 and Proceeds 3

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

Mastering the Made Whole Rule by Steven Theesfeld, Esq., Yost & Baill LLP, Minneapolis, Minnesota

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE October 24, 2012 Session

Presenting a live 90 minute webinar with interactive Q&A. Td Today s faculty features:

State By State Survey:

ALLOCATION AMONG MULTIPLE CARRIERS IN CONSTRUCTION DEFECT LITIGATION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) MEMORANDUM OPINION and ORDER

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

Vance v. Pekin Ins. Co., 457 N.W.2d 589 (Iowa, 1990)

2013 Thomson Reuters. No Claim to Orig. US Gov. Works.

Recent Cases Addressing Professional Services Coverage & Exclusions Under General Liability, Directors & Officers And Professional Liability Policies

Transcription:

The Evolution of the Your Work Exclusion and Strategies for Keeping Your Subrogation Recovery Out of Its Grasp Teirney S. Christenson Steven L. Theesfeld

History of the Your Work Exclusion

The Standard CGL Policy Began in 1940 s Originally written for a specific hazard ISO standardization (1970 s present)

The Standard CGL Policy

The Standard CGL Policy

Judicial Interpretation if a contractor uses inadequate building materials, or performs shoddy workmanship, he takes a calculated business risk that no damage will take place. If damage does take place, it flows as an ordinary and natural consequence of the contractor s failure to perform the construction properly or as contracted [and] [t]here can be no coverage for such damage. Viking Construction Management, Inc. v. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co., 358 Ill.App.3d 34, 42, 831 N.E.2d 1 (2005)

Judicial Interpretation That which is intended is, by definition, not accidental A general liability policy is not intended to provide coverage for those risks which are within the insured s control Since the quality of construction is always within the control of the contractor any loss which results from poor workmanship cannot possibly be considered fortuitous. Cincinnati Insurance v. Motorists Mutual Insurance Co., 306 S.W.3d 69 (Ky. 2010)

STRATEGY Argue that this broad interpretation of occurrence renders the your work exclusion meaningless

The Standard CGL Policy Exclusion:

The Standard CGL Policy Exclusion:

The Standard CGL Policy Exclusion:

That Particular Part

That Particular Part Moment of occurrence v. Full project Essex Ins. Co. v. Kart Constr., Inc. 2015 WL 4730540 (Fla. 2015) Defective v. Non-defective Greystone Const. Inc. v. National Fire & Marine 661 F.3d 1272 (10 th Cir. 2011) (Colorado) Other property v. Your work Cogswell Farm v. Tower Group 110 A.3d 822 (N.H. 2015) ambiguity exists construed against insurer.

Evolution of the Your Work Exclusion

Your Work Rationale It is well established that the purpose of comprehensive liability insurance coverage is to provide protection for personal injury or property damage caused by the product only and not for the replacement or repair of the product. The policy reasons for this result are obvious. If insurance proceeds could be used to pay for the repairing and/or replacing of poorly constructed products, a contractor or subcontractor could receive initial payment for its work and then receive subsequent payment from the insurance company to repair and replace it. Equally repugnant on policy grounds is the notion that the presence of insurance obviates the obligation to perform the job initially in a workmanlike manner. Centex Homes Corp., 444 So.2d 66, 67 (Fla. 1984)

Your Work Rationale 1) Prevents double pay 2) Maintains responsibility and obligation of contractor to perform quality work 3) Insurance not a performance bond

Your Work Rationale Me (Owner) $$ Theesfeld Co. (General) $$ ABC Insurance Co.

Your Work Rationale Me (Owner) $$ Theesfeld Co. (General) $$ DEF Insurance Co.

Your Work Rationale Me (Owner) $$ $$ DEF Insurance Co. Theesfeld Co. (General) bankrupt/no assets ABC Insurance Co. no coverage

Factual Scenarios New Foundation (Grinnell Mut. v. Lynne, 686 N.W.2d 118, (N.D. 2004))

Factual Scenarios Shingles (Auto-Owners v. Home Pride, 684 N.W.2d 571 (Neb. 2004))

Factual Scenarios Road Projects (L-J, Inc. v. Bituminous Fire and Marine, 621 S.E.2d 33 (S.C. 2005))

Factual Scenarios Stucco (Lennar Corp. v. Great American Ins. Co., 200 S.W.3d 651 (Tex. 2006))

Factual Scenarios Landscaping (Pacific Indemnity v. Lampro, 86 Mass. App. Ct. 60 (Mass. 2014))

Exceptions, Enhancements and Other Avenues to Recovery

Subcontractor Exception

Subcontractor Exception Foundations (American Girl, 673 N.W.2d 65 (Wis. 2004))

Subcontractor Exception Warning ISO has drafted endorsement which eliminates subcontractor exception. See Grinnell Mutual Reinsurance Company v. Wollak Construction, Inc., Civ. No. 10-350 (RHK/LIB) (D. Minn. Oct. 15, 2010) Breesee Homes, Inc. v. Farmers Ins. Exchange, 227 Or. App. 587, 206 P.3d 1091 (2009) (general chose subcontactor).

Enhancements in Policy

Other Policies Builder s Rick Policy First-party coverage Designed specifically to protect against liability for direct physical loss or damage to a structure or project during construction Also called course of construction insurance Errors & Omissions Insurance Excess and Umbrella Policies

Final Avenues Toward Recovery Claim Assignment Illusory Coverage Questions?