Lamar Truck Plaza, Inc. v. Sentry Ins.
Decision Date | 09 June 1988 |
Docket Number | No. 86CA1226,86CA1226 |
Citation | 757 P.2d 1143 |
Parties | LAMAR TRUCK PLAZA, INC., a Colorado corporation, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. SENTRY INSURANCE, a mutual company, Defendant-Appellee. . IV |
Court | Colorado Court of Appeals |
John Gehlhausen, P.C., John Gehlhausen, Darla K. Scranton, Lamar, for plaintiff-appellant.
Hall & Evans, Brooke Wunnicke, Barbara A. Duff, Denver, for defendant-appellee.
Lamar Truck Plaza, Inc. (Lamar), appeals the summary judgment entered in favor of Sentry Insurance (Sentry), in which the phrase "loss of use of tangible property" in a comprehensive general liability insurance policy was held not to include the loss to which Lamar was exposed. We affirm.
Lamar was sued by its female employees for alleged sexual discrimination and harassment. The damages claimed were loss of pay and retirement, medical, and other benefits. Lamar sought to have this claim covered under the property damage section of its liability policy issued by Sentry. Sentry denied coverage, and Lamar brought this declaratory judgment action.
Lamar's sole contention on appeal is that the trial court erred in determining that the claims against Lamar were not covered because loss of pay and benefits did not constitute a "loss of use of tangible property." We disagree.
Lamar's policy provided coverage for:
Property damage was defined as:
(emphasis added)
In this context, tangible property is that which is capable of being handled, touched, or physically possessed. See Sturges Manufacturing Co. v. Utica Mutual Insurance Co., 347 N.Y.S.2d 388, 75 Misc.2d 416 (1973); Lay v. Aetna Insurance Co., 599 S.W.2d 684 (Tex.Civ.App.1980). Purely economic losses are not included in this definition. Oxford Lumber Co. v. Lumbermens Mutual Insurance Co., 472 So.2d 973 (Ala.1985) ( ); Travelers Indemnity Co. v. State, 140 Ariz. 194, 680 P.2d 1255 (App.1984) ( ); L. Ray Packing Co. v. Commercial Union Insurance Co., 469 A.2d 832 (Me.1983) (...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
AMCO Ins. Co. v. Carpet Direct Corp.
...Family Mutual Insurance Co. v. Teamcorp., Inc. , 659 F.Supp.2d 1115, 1130 (D.Colo.2009) (quoting Lamar Truck Plaza, Inc. v. Sentry Insurance , 757 P.2d 1143, 1144 (Colo.App.1988) ).5 By contrast, “[p]urely economic losses are not included in this definition.” Id.6 See also ERA Franchise Sys......
-
Graber v. State Farm Fire and Cas. Co.
...301, 303. Tangible property is property that is capable of being handled, touched or physically possessed. Lamar Truck Plaza, Inc. v. Sentry Ins. (Colo.App.1988), 757 P.2d 1143, 1144. See also Sturges Manufacturing Co. v. Utica Mutual Ins. Co. (1973), 347 N.Y.S.2d 388, 75 Misc.2d 416 and La......
-
Colo. Cas. Ins. Co. v. Infinity Land Corp.
..."tangible property" means "that which is capable of being handled, touched, or physically possessed." Lamar Truck Plaza, Inc. v. Sentry Ins., 757 P.2d 1143, 1144 (Colo. App. 1988) (observing that purely economic damages are not included within the term "property damage" in a comprehensive g......
-
American Family Mut. Ins. Co. v. Teamcorp., Inc.
...defined "tangible property" as that which is capable of being handled, touched, or physically possessed. Lamar Truck Plaza, Inc. v. Sentry Ins., 757 P.2d 1143, 1144 (Colo.Ct.App.1988). The house under construction can be touched; it is made of cement, wood and other physical materials, and ......