In clarifying the application of a nearly 50-year-old case, the state Supreme Court has rejected an insurance carrier’s argument that property owners, who were additional named insureds under a restaurant’s commercial umbrella policy, were precluded from coverage under the policy’s employer’s liability exclusion.
The state Supreme Court’s decision in Mutual Benefit Insurance v. Politsopoulos declined to broadly interpret the meaning of “the insureds” in the policy’s employer’s liability exclusion, and held that the exclusion did not apply to the co-insureds who were the subject of a personal injury lawsuit.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
