Ambiguous Policy Exclusions Insufficient to Protect Insurers in Actions Stemming from Damage due to Collapse of World Trade Center
Weg and Myers P.C. was successful in having the Second Circuit Court of
Appeals reverse a decision by the District Court for the Southern District
of New York that granted summary judgment to the insurer of a building
damaged by debris from the collapse of the World Trade Center. In
Parks Real Estate Purchasing Group v. St. Paul Fire and Marine Insurance Company, the District Court, while rejecting arguments asserting that the claim
was excluded based upon the "mechanical breakdown" and "wear
and tear" exclusions in the policy, granted summary judgment to the
carrier based upon an exclusion of coverage for "contamination".
The Second Circuit Court of Appeals reversed, holding that the word "contamination"
was ambiguous as it was used in the exclusion to an all-risk policy. The
Court found instead that the meaning of the term "contamination"
was an issue of fact to be determined by the trier of fact, and reversed
and remanded case.
Click here for a copy of the Second Circuit's decision.
Permalink