EVANSTON INSURANCE COMPANY, Plaintiff-Counter Defendant-Appellant, v. J&J CABLE CONSTRUCTION, LLC, Dixie Electric Cooperative, Marrell A. Crittenden, Jr., individually and as Next Friend of M. C. and A. C., Courtney Bynum Crittenden, individually and as Next Friend of M. C. and A. C., Caroline Torrence, Defendants-Counter Claimants-Appellees.
Following oral argument and a review of the record, we affirm the district court's summary judgment order. First, on these facts, there are no legally significant distinctions between the pollution exclusion clause here (including its definition of “pollutants”) and the clause at issue in United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. Armstrong, 479 So.2d 1164, 1168 (Ala. 1985). Second, the “pollutant” here (sewage) is the same as the one at issue there. Id. at 1166. Third, the incident's context here puts it further from “industry-related pollution” than the “flow[ing]” of “raw sewage ․ onto adjacent land” in Armstrong. Id. at 1166, 1168. Under the circumstances, the district court correctly ruled that Armstrong controls.