Travelers Prop. Cas. Co. of Am. v. Cont'l Cas. Co.
Decision Date | 04 January 2017 |
Docket Number | CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:14–CV–2207–WCO |
Citation | 226 F.Supp.3d 1359 |
Parties | TRAVELERS PROPERTY CASUALTY COMPANY OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. CONTINENTAL CASUALTY COMPANY and C.K.S. Packaging, Inc., Defendants. |
Court | U.S. District Court — Northern District of Georgia |
Ariel Ephraim Shapiro, David Marlow Atkinson, Swift, Currie, McGhee & Hiers, LLP, Henry E. Scrudder, Jr., Scrudder Bass Quillian Horlock Taylor & Lazarus, Atlanta, GA, for Plaintiff.
Daniel Pickett, James T. Byrnes, Kristin V. Gallagher, Carroll McNulty & Kull, LLC, Basking Ridge, NJ, Joshua C. Weisberg, Carroll McNulty & Kull, LLC, New York, NY, David Cole Rhodes, Henry E. Scrudder, Jr., Scrudder, Bass, Quillian, Horlock, Taylor & Lazarus LLP, J. Robert Persons, Smith, Moore, Leatherwood, LLP, Atlanta, GA, for Defendants.
The captioned case is before the court for consideration of defendant Continental Casualty Company's motion for summary judgment [84]; plaintiff Travelers Property Casualty Company of America's motion for summary judgment [85]; and defendant C.K.S. Packaging, Inc.'s motion to strike [96].
Defendant C.K.S. Packaging, Inc. ("CKS") is a manufacturer and supplier of plastic containers, headquartered in Atlanta, Georgia. (Second Am. Compl. ¶ 6.) CKS has been named as a defendant or third-party defendant in personal injury lawsuits, filed in several states, alleging that a type of plastic bottle it manufactured caused or contributed to personal injuries ("Underlying Cases"). (Id. at ¶ 7.) Each of the Underlying Cases involves a bottle manufactured by CKS that was filled with gel fuel by another company, labeled, and sold. (Pl.'s Facts ¶ 3.) Each of the claimants in the Underlying Cases sought to recover for burn injuries allegedly caused when gel fuel from a CKS bottle was used in connection with a firepot. (Id. at ¶ 7.) CKS has requested coverage from Travelers Property Casualty Company of America ("Travelers") and Continental Casualty Company ("Continental") for the Underlying Cases. (Id. at ¶ 5.)
Travelers issued five primary one year general liability insurance policies to CKS, with respective limits of $950,000 per occurrence and $5,000,000 in the general aggregate, covering the policy periods of December 27, 2009 to December 27, 2010, December 27, 2010 to December 27, 2011, December 27, 2011 to December 27, 2012, December 27, 2012 to December 27, 2013, and December 27, 2013 to December 27, 2014 (the "Travelers Policies"). (Def.'s Facts ¶ 81.) The 2009–2010, 2010–2011, 2011–2012, and 2012–2013 Travelers Policies are individually subject to a $50,000 self-insured retention per occurrence. The 2013–2014 Travelers Policy is subject to a $100,000 self-insured retention per occurrence. (Id. at ¶ 82.)
The Travelers Policies contain, in pertinent part, the following:
(Compl. Ex. A2.)
The 2011–2012, 2012–2013, and 2013–2014 Travelers Policies contain the following amended definition of "occurrence," also known as a "batch clause":
(Def.'s Facts ¶ 86.) When issued, the 2009–2010 and 2010–2011 Travelers Policies did not contain a batch clause. (Pl.'s Additional Facts ¶¶ 4–5.) After this lawsuit was filed, these policies were reformed to include the batch clause. (Id. at ¶ 8.)
The Travelers Policies also contain the following non-cumulation clause:
Continental issued five commercial umbrella policies to CKS, under policy number 4017854512, in effect from December 27, 2009 to December 27, 2010, December 27, 2010 to December 27, 2011, December 27, 2011 to December 27, 2012, December 27, 2012 to December 27, 2013, and December 27, 2013 to December 27, 2014 (the "Continental Policies"). (Id. at ¶ 95.) The Continental Policies have limits of $25,000,000 each incident and $25,000,000 in the aggregate and are specifically underwritten to provide coverage in excess of the Travelers Policies. (Id. at ¶ 96.)
The Continental Policies contain the following condition:
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Amerisure Ins. Co. v. Auchter Co., Case No. 3:16-cv-407-J-39JRK
...System constitutes one occurrence rendering it liable for no more than $ 1,000,000.00, relying on Travelers Prop. Cas. Co. of Am. v. Cont'l Cas. Co., 226 F. Supp. 3d 1359, 1368 (N.D. Ga. 2017). Travelers held that Georgia law requires application of the "cause test" to determine that number......
-
Insurance
...226 Ga. App. 846, 847, 487 S.E.2d 389, 391 (1997)).93. Id. at 429, 793 S.E.2d at 609. 94. Id.95. Id. at 429-30, 793 S.E.2d at 609.96. 226 F. Supp. 3d 1359 (N.D. Ga. 2017).97. Id. at 1360-65.98. In State Auto Property & Casualty Co. v. Matty, 286 Ga. 611, 690 S.E.2d 614 (2010), the Georgia S......