50 F.3d 370 (6th Cir. 1995), 93-6218, Transamerica Ins. Co. v. Duro Bag Mfg. Co.
|Citation:||50 F.3d 370|
|Party Name:||TRANSAMERICA INSURANCE COMPANY, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. DURO BAG MANUFACTURING COMPANY, Defendant-Appellant.|
|Case Date:||February 16, 1995|
|Court:||United States Courts of Appeals, Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit|
Argued Jan. 17, 1995.
David A. Brill, Goldberg & Simpson, Louisville, KY.
David P. Cutler (argued and briefed) and Edwin J. Hull, Goggins, Cutler & Hull, Chicago, IL, for plaintiff-appellee.
Thomas C. Hill, Taft, Stettinius & Hollister, Cincinnati, OH, Catherine J. Serafin, James R. Wagner (briefed), Anderson, Kill, Olick & Oshinsky, Washington, DC, and Eugene R. Anderson (argued), Anderson, Kill, Olick & Oshinsky, New York City, for defendant-appellant.
Douglas W. Becker (briefed), Becker, Farris & Gallagher, Louisville, KY, Daniel I. Davidson (argued and briefed), Russell F. Smith, III, Spiegel & McDiarmid, Washington, DC, Zachary M. Kafoglis (briefed), Satterfield & Kafoglis, Bowling Green, KY, and Laura A. Foggan (briefed), Wiley, Rein & Fielding, Washington, DC, for amici curiae.
Before: ENGEL, KENNEDY, and SUHRHEINRICH, Circuit Judges.
KENNEDY, Circuit Judge.
In 1989, the Environmental Protection Agency ("EPA") sued defendant, Duro Bag Manufacturing Company, seeking to hold it liable for the costs of cleaning up environmental damage at a Kentucky landfill. Defendant notified its insurer, plaintiff Transamerica Insurance Company, of the suit and sought coverage. Plaintiff denied coverage and filed the instant declaratory judgment
action, seeking a court order holding that the pollution exclusion clause contained in the policy bars coverage. The District Court granted summary judgment in favor of plaintiff, and defendant now appeals. We affirm.
From 1973 to 1979, defendant deposited drums and fiberboard barrels containing ink and glue at the Newport landfill in Kentucky. In 1989, the EPA filed suit against defendant, seeking to hold the company liable for the costs of the clean-up. Defendant's insurer denied coverage and filed the instant declaratory judgment action. This action was stayed pending the outcome of the EPA suit. After the EPA and defendant negotiated a settlement for $350,000, the stay was lifted, and the parties filed cross-motions for summary judgment. The key dispute revolves around the meaning of the phrase "sudden and accidental" in the pollution...
To continue readingFREE SIGN UP