By: Derek Hawkins//December 24, 2019//
WI Court of Appeals – District III
Case Name: Superior Water, Light and Power Company v. Certain Underwriters at Lloyds, et al.
Case No.: 2018AP1926
Officials: Stark, P.J., Hruz and Seidl, JJ.
Focus: Insurance Claim – Coverage
This case concerns an insurance coverage dispute regarding three excess liability insurance policies issued to Superior Water, Light and Power Company (Superior Water) in 1970 by a host of insurance companies (collectively, the London Market Insurers (LMI)). In the circuit court, Superior Water sought a declaration that the policies obligated LMI to indemnify Superior Water for environmental contamination cleanup costs associated with a former manufactured gas plant site (the Site). The circuit court granted LMI’s motion to dismiss after concluding that the term “one event,” as used in the policies’ definition of a coverage-triggering occurrence, referred solely to a leak or spill of contaminants during the policy period.
On appeal, Superior Water argues the circuit court erred by adopting a narrower definition of the term “one event” than is supported by the plain meaning of that term. We agree with Superior Water insomuch as we conclude that the policies’ occurrence definition is ambiguous. Given the existing record and procedural posture of this case, we are unable to properly analyze and resolve the legal ramifications of our concluding that the subject language is ambiguous. Therefore, we remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.