No Duty to Defend Separate Certificate of Insurance or Policy if Additional Insured Not Listed
A subcontractor and contractor entered into a contract that required the subcontractor to obtain insurance and name the contractor as an additional insured. The subcontractor provided the contractor with a certificate of insurance, but failed to name the contractor in its commercial general liability policy as an additional insured. Later, the contractor dissolved and was acquired by a second company, who was then named as an additional insured. An employee of the second company was injured and brought suit against both the first and second contractors. The insurer who provided the CGL policy sought that it had no duty to defend because the first contractor was not named as an additional insured and because the second contractor was barred from coverage by the employee exclusion. The insurer who provided an umbrella insurance policy sought that it had no duty to defend the second contractor because it was barred by the employee exclusion.
The court held that there was no duty to defend the first contractor because the subcontractor did not list the first contractor as an additional insured in the certificate of insurance, and since the certificate contained a disclaimer that it would “not amend, extend or alter the coverage afforded by the policies,” the contractor was not an additional insured under the CGL policy. In addition, the court noted that the contract did not require that the subcontractor obtain an umbrella policy; therefore, the insurer providing the umbrella policy also had no duty to defend the contractor.
The court held there was no duty to defend the second contractor, considering all the evidence in the record pertinent to a ruling on a motion for summary judgment; there was no question of material fact; and the injured person was an employee of the second contractor acting in the scope of employment. The critical issue here was that the court was not limited in looking only at the pleadings.
Owners Ins. Co. v. Seamless Gutter Corp., 2011 WL 5578940, —N.E.2d —- (Ill.App. 1 Dist., 2011).
