California Court of Appeal

Reset A A Font size: Print

Pennsylvania Gen. Ins. Co. v. Am. Safety Indem. Co., D054522

In a suit for equitable contribution for a portion of the defense and indemnity costs paid by the plaintiff-insurer in the underlying construction defect litigation against the insured, trial court's judgment in favor of the defendant-insurer is reversed as, the defendant's CGL policy is reasonably susceptible to the interpretation that the trigger of coverage was damage to property, not the causal conduct, and the 1999 endorsements were merely designed to obviate the application of the "progressive damage-continuous trigger" articulated in Montrose Chem. Corp. v. Admiral Ins. Co. (1995) 10 Cal. 4th 645.

Appellate Information

  • Submitted 06/28/2010
  • Decided 06/03/2010
  • Published 06/28/2010

Judges

Court

  • California Court of Appeal

Counsel