By: Derek Hawkins//August 25, 2015//
Civil
7th Circuit Court of Appeals
Officials: FLAUM, WILLIAMS, and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges
Commercial Liability – Insurance Coverage – Duty to Defend
No. 14-3084 Joe Panfil v. Nautilus Insurance Company
In light of all the terms of the insurance policy, insurance carrier’s failure to defend insured despite existence of employee exclusion provision
Under the second interpretation, the Contractor Subcontracted Work Endorsement, in conjunction with the Employee Exclusion, just means to preserve coverage for injuries to non-“employees” arising out of the work of subcontractors working solely for the insured. The effect of the Contractors-Subcontracted Work Endorsement is to limit any coverage for injury at the construction site to injury arising out of work done by contractors or subcontractors working solely for the insured. And the Employee Exclusion places a second, separate limit on coverage, which further restricts bodily injury coverage to injuries sustained by non- “employees.” Coverage still remains for bodily injury to non-“employees” arising out of the work of contractors or subcontractors working solely for the insured. The cumulative restrictions on coverage provided under the Employee Exclusion and the Contractors-Subcontracted Work Endorsement take away some, but not all, coverage.”
Affirmed