A: One of the great beauties of the United States is that you can sue anyone for just about anything. But whether the organizers would be held liable if such suits developed can only be determined by a court of law.

Successful allegations of liability probably would include charges such as insufficient security, advance knowledge of the likelihood of bombings, or selection of a known dangerous race route. Marathon participants would have signed disclaimers, likely waiving and releasing the organizers from any and all claims. Assuming those are held valid, the participants, themselves, would have little recourse against the organizers.

Members of the crowd watching the event could be a different story. They will not have waived their right to claims for injury or damages, but they still would have to prove liability. Again, can a lack of security, known unsafe route, or failure to cancel once threats of bombings were received be established?

The most important point here is that liability policies will defend their insureds for allegations that do, or potentially could, fall under the provisions of the policy.

Q: So, would such liability claims be covered on a typical liability policy?

A: First off, even the President calling something “terrorism” doesn't make it so for insurance purposes. For insurance purposes, the damage and injuries were caused by “explosion,” which typically is covered by both liability and property insurance policies. In general, the only explosions that are not covered are those involving the exploding of steam boilers, steam pipes, and steam turbines on a property policy. Although the Boston bombs reportedly were housed in pressure cookers, this exclusion would not apply.

Q: What about terrorism?

A: After terroristic occurrences of 9/11, the Terrorism Risk Insurance Act (TRIA) of 2002 was enacted and then reauthorized in 2007. Various terrorism exclusionary endorsements were developed, and these are attached to most insurance commercial insurance policies.

Many of the exclusions are triggered only when a “Certified Act of Terrorism” is involved. It must be certified as such by the Secretary of the Treasury, in concurrence with the Secretary of State and the U.S. Attorney General. There also must be more than $5 million in losses involving all policies subject to TRIA in order to meet the certified act classification.

There also are exclusions for damage or injury arising from terrorism other than Certified Acts. Those types of exclusions and limitations have even higher property damage thresholds. They typically would require at least $25 million of property damage in the aggregate and injury or death to more than fifty people.

Policyholders can buy coverage, but it is very expensive and must involve an insurer agreeing to provide it. Hence the various caps and limitations that may be offered as alternatives to the strict exclusions.

It is unlikely that Marathon organizers would carry such coverage, but in this case it probably is not necessary. For the time being the bombings were explosions that typically would be covered on most insurance policies.

For more information on the subject of terrorism and insurance, refer to the Commercial Property Coverage Guide, 5^th Edition, by Donald S. Malecki, CPCU, and published by The National Underwriter Company. Other resources may be found on FC&S Online.