February 27, 2015

Pardalis & Nohavicka Insurance Coverage Update: No Offset Permitted If Not In Policy.

Everest commercial excess insurance liability policy provided that obligation was to pay the lesser of the $2 million coverage limit called for under a trade contract or $10 million limit of the policy. Insurer argued that it was entitled to an off-set of $1 million paid by the primary insurer. Everest contended that it was left to cover a $1 million shortfall, since a trade contract required coverage limits of only $2 million, and the primary insurer paid $1 million. Court ruled that policy interpretation  governed by the policy terms not by the terms of the underlying trade contracts.  Everest pays out $2M.

[Trade Contract: On construction management contracts, a construction manager (CM) is hired to provide advice to the client during the pre-construction stages and then to manage the construction on the project. The work is contracted to separate contractors. These contractors are referred to as trade contractors rather than sub-contractors (because they are contracted directly by the client, rather than being sub-contracted to the construction manager.)].

New York State Ins. Fund v Everest Natl. Ins. Co.

Connect with us

Visit our FacebookVisit our InstagramVisit our TwitterVisit our LinkedInVisit our YouTube channel
The information on this website is for general information purposes only. Nothing on this site should be taken as legal advice for any individual case or situation. 
The viewing of this website does not constitute an attorney-client relationship. Attorney Advertising: Prior results DO NOT guarantee similar results.

Copyright © 2024 Pardalis & Nohavicka LLP. All Rights Reserved. Website Designed & Developed by Ruxbo
magnifier linkedin facebook pinterest youtube rss twitter instagram facebook-blank rss-blank linkedin-blank pinterest youtube twitter instagram