A U.S. District court ruled in favor of an insurer seeking contribution from another insurer for the defense of a mutual insured. The case is Am. States Ins. Co. v. Ins. Co. of the Pa., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 46171 (E.D. Cal. 2017). 

Sierra-Pacific Industries (Sierra-Pacific) conducted timber harvesting on a piece of land in California. The company entered a logging agreement with Howell's Forest Harvesting (Howell), which required Howell to obtain a CGL policy that named Sierra-Pacific as an additional insured. Howell purchased the required coverage from American States Insurance (American States), but the policy only extended to Sierra-Pacific if Howell was found liable for operations conducted on behalf of Sierra-Pacific. 

Sierra-Pacific also opted to purchase a policy from the Insurance Company of the State of Pennsylvania (Pennsylvania) that provided both primary and excess coverage. The policy would provide excess coverage when an underlying policy covering Sierra-Pacific, such as Howell's policy from American States, reached its limits due to the payment of claims. The Pennsylvania policy would apply as primary coverage when Sierra-Pacific was found liable for property damage that was not covered by an underlying policy. 

Continue Reading for Free

Register and gain access to:

  • Quality content from industry experts with over 60 years insurance experience, combined
  • Customizable alerts of changes in relevant policies and trends
  • Search and navigate Q&As to find answers to your specific questions
  • Filter by article, discussion, analysis and more to find the exact information you’re looking for
  • Continually updated to bring you the latest reports, trending topics, and coverage analysis