Presenting a live 90-minute webinar with interactive Q&A Horizontal vs. Vertical Exhaustion of Insurance: Priority of Coverage and Settlement for Less Than Policy Limits THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 1, 2018 1pm Eastern | 12pm Central | 11am Mountain | 10am Pacific Today’s faculty features: K. Alexandra Byrd, Attorney, Saxe Doernberger & Vita , Trumbull, Conn. Celia B. Waters, Attorney, Saxe Doernberger & Vita , Trumbull, Conn. The audio portion of the conference may be accessed via the telephone or by using your computer's speakers. Please refer to the instructions emailed to registrants for additional information. If you have any questions, please contact Customer Service at 1-800-926-7926 ext. 1 .
Tips for Optimal Quality FOR LIVE EVENT ONLY Sound Quality If you are listening via your computer speakers, please note that the quality of your sound will vary depending on the speed and quality of your internet connection. If the sound quality is not satisfactory, you may listen via the phone: dial 1-866-927-5568 and enter your PIN when prompted. Otherwise, please send us a chat or e-mail sound@straffordpub.com immediately so we can address the problem. If you dialed in and have any difficulties during the call, press *0 for assistance. Viewing Quality To maximize your screen, press the F11 key on your keyboard. To exit full screen, press the F11 key again.
Continuing Education Credits FOR LIVE EVENT ONLY In order for us to process your continuing education credit, you must confirm your participation in this webinar by completing and submitting the Attendance Affirmation/Evaluation after the webinar. A link to the Attendance Affirmation/Evaluation will be in the thank you email that you will receive immediately following the program. For additional information about continuing education, call us at 1-800-926-7926 ext. 2.
Program Materials FOR LIVE EVENT ONLY If you have not printed the conference materials for this program, please complete the following steps: Click on the ^ symbol next to “Conference Materials” in the middle of the left - • hand column on your screen. • Click on the tab labeled “Handouts” that appears, and there you will see a PDF of the slides for today's program. • Double click on the PDF and a separate page will open. Print the slides by clicking on the printer icon. •
Today’s Agenda • Overview of horizontal versus vertical exhaustion in the additional insured context • Review of relevant case law • Strategies for resolving issues when the primary carrier settles for less than policy limits • Practical tips 5
Risk Transfer Methods Contractual Indemnity: Downstream Sub ’ s party agrees to indemnify upstream Insurance party from project-related losses Sub ’ s Owner Contractor Claim Indemnity Insurance : Downstream party agrees to purchase insurance which covers upstream party as an “ additional Contractor ’ s insured ” Insurance 6
Priority of Coverage Owner’s Corporate GC’s Excess Insurance (Owner’s AI Excess Insurance) Excess Insurance GC’s Primary Insurance Owner’s Corporate (Owner’s AI Carrier) Primary Insurance General Contractor Promise to Owner Indemnify (“GC”) Promise to Procure Insurance 7
Which Policy Responds Second? Sharing 8
Priority of Coverage: State by State Horizontal Exhaustion : Vertical Exhaustion: California 4 th Cir. (Virginia) Illinois 5 th Cir. (Texas) New Jersey 8 th Cir. (Arkansas) New York Kentucky Missouri 9
Vertical Exhaustion General Contractor sued GC tenders to AI primary and (4) $5M Excess (2) $5M Excess AI excess AI primary pays first, then AI excess carrier pays (3) $1M Primary (1) $1M Primary General Contractor Subcontractor 10
Vertical Exhaustion Example: Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. RLI Ins. Co., 292 F .3d 583 (8 th Cir. 2002) Contract required $2M in liability insurance; Cheyenne • obtained $1M primary/$10M excess $11M settlement: paid by St. Paul ($1M) and RLI ($10M) • Result: St. Paul paid first and RLI paid second; no • contribution from Wal- Mart’s insurer (2) RLI $10M Excess National Union $10M Primary (1) St. Paul $1M Primary Cheyenne Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. Supplier Retailer Indemnity 11
Avoiding Circuity of Litigation 12
Horizonal Exhaustion All available primary policies must exhaust first Focus on policy language, not underlying contract Excess policy is a payer of last resort 13
Horizontal Exhaustion: The Bovis Case Owner (DASNY) Gen. Ctr. Const. Mgr. Steel Ctr. (STONEWALL) (BOVIS) (SMI-OWEN) Liberty $1M Primary Illinois $1M Primary Policy Policy Elevator Sub. (AJ MCNULTY) Westchester $10M Great American Umbrella Concrete Sub. (J&A) QBE $1M Primary United $5M Umbrella Decedent 14
Bovis: Trial Court Apportionment QBE 1 $1,000,000 J&A Primary UNITED 2 $5,000,000 J&A Umbrella LIBERTY 3 $1,000,000 Stonewall Primary WESTCHESTER 4 $10,000,000 Stonewall Umbrella ILLINOIS 5 $1,000,000 BOVIS Primary 15
Bovis: Appellate Court Apportionment QBE 1 $1,000,000 J&A Primary LIBERTY 2 $1,000,000 Stonewall Primary ILLINOIS 3 $1,000,000 BOVIS Primary UNITED WESTCHESTER 4 $5,000,000 $10,000,000 Sharing pro rata J&A Umbrella Stonewall Umbrella 16
HDI-Gerling Am. Ins. Co. v Zurich Am. Ins. Co .: Manuscript Endoremsents City of New York Skanska USA Civil Siemens Corporation Northeast HDI-Gerling (Siemens Primary) Zurich (Skanska Primary) 17
HDI-Gerling Am. Ins. Co. v Zurich Am. Ins. Co. , 2017 NY Slip Op 01955 [1st Dept Mar. 16, 2017] Zurich Policy 18
Anti-Indemnity Statutes & Priority of Coverage +/- 44 states recognize some form of anti-indemnity limitation in construction contracts Diminish circuity of litigation argument Restrictions on vertical exhaustion Insofar as the claim against the upstream party implicates such party’s own negligence, the argument that the sub’s excess carrier will ultimately pay whether vertical or horizontal exhaustion is applied may not be accurate! 19
Anti-Indemnity Statutes: Insurance Implications Many states preclude GC from requiring Sub to obtain AI coverage that protects GC from its own negligence e.g., California, Colorado, Kansas, Louisiana, Michigan, Montana, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Oregon and Texas A few states have given some indication that the anti- indemnity prohibition extends to insurance e.g., Delaware, Georgia and Ohio To the extent claims against the additional insured implicate its own negligence, the AI coverage and GC’s own coverage may both be required to provide indemnity 20
ISO’s First Attempt at Solution Primary CGL - CG 20 01 04 13 CG 20 01 04 13 21
ISO’s Second Attempt at Solution Excess - CX 24 33 11 16 CX 24 33 11 16 22
ISO’s Second Attempt at Solution Umbrella - CU 24 78 11 16 CU 24 78 11 16 23
Horizontal Exhaustion: Two-Part Solution 1. Fix the trade contract 2. Fix the policies • Ensure subcontractor’s primary policy provides primary/non-contributory coverage for GC • Modify subcontractor’s excess policy to provide primary/non-contributory coverage for GC 24
Sample Excess Policy Endorsement Endorsement – Excess Liability Policy Priority of Coverage THIS ENDORSEMENT CHANGES THE POLICY. PLEASE READ IT CAREFULLY. Any entity qualifying as an additional insured on the insurance stated in the Schedule of Underlying Insurance shall be an additional insured on this policy. This insurance shall apply immediately upon exhaustion of the insurance stated in the Schedule of Underlying Insurance as respects the coverage afforded to any additional insured. This insurance shall apply before any other insurance available to the additional insured, on which the additional insured is a named insured, whether such other insurance is primary, excess, contingent, or on any other basis, and we will not seek contribution from such insurance for defense or indemnity. Where an entity qualifies as an additional insured on insurance stated in the Schedule of Underlying Insurance based on a written agreement to provide liability insurance, the limits of insurance provided by this policy shall not exceed the limits of insurance required by such written agreement. 25
What happens when the insured settles with the primary carrier for less than policy limits? It depends on your jurisdiction and policy language . . . 26
Zeig v. Massachusetts Bonding & Ins. Co., 23 F.2d 665 (2d Cir. 1928) Settlement by insured with primary carrier did not eliminate excess coverage Excess carrier – no rational interest in whether insured collected full primary limits Public policy: delay, promotion of litigation, chilling effect on settlements But, parties could impose conditions precedent if they chose to do so . . . 27
Comercia Inc. v. Zurich American Insurance Co., 498 F.Supp.2d 1019 (E.D. Mich. 2007) Distinguished Zeig – lack of specificity in excess policy language Public policy favors settlements, but can’t supersede unambiguous policy language Policy required “actual payment of losses” by the underlying insurer 28
Recommend
More recommend
