Endurance American Specialty Insurance v. Century Surety Co.
46 F. Supp. 3d 398 | District Court, S.D. New York | 2014
What This Case Means for Subcontractors
Hayden, a roofing subcontractor, was added as an additional insured on Century Surety's policy through an indemnification agreement with Pinnacle. When Hayden faced a lawsuit, both Endurance and Century had insurance policies that could cover it. The court ruled that Hayden qualifies as an additional insured under Century's policy and that an employer liability exclusion doesn't block coverage because it only applies to the named insured (Pinnacle), not additional insureds. Both policies must share the cost of defense and indemnification equally.
Key Takeaways
- •Get written confirmation you're added as an additional insured on your general contractor's or project owner's insurance policy—don't assume it's automatic.
- •Employer liability exclusions in insurance policies typically only protect the named insured, not additional insureds, so you may still have coverage even if the named insured doesn't.
- •When multiple insurance policies cover the same claim, courts often split the cost equally between them rather than making one policy pay first—budget accordingly.
The named insured clearly refers to Pinnacle, the only insured named in Declarations.
Frequently Asked Question
If I'm added as an additional insured on a contractor's insurance policy, am I protected if they get sued?
Yes, but only if the policy language actually names you as an additional insured. Employer liability exclusions in the policy typically don't apply to additional insureds—only to the contractor who bought the policy. Make sure you have written proof of your additional insured status before work starts.
Related Cases
Gall v. United States
Appellate courts must review all sentences under an abuse-of-discretion standard regardless of whether they fall inside or outside the Guidelines range, and cannot require extraordinary circumstances to justify sentences outside the range.
Piotrowski v. City of Houston
Municipal liability under § 1983 requires proof of official policy as the moving force; isolated employee misconduct insufficient, and equal protection claim time-barred.
Adarand Constructors, Inc. v. Pena
Federal race-based classifications must be analyzed under strict scrutiny regardless of whether they benefit or burden minorities, and the Fifth Amendment's equal protection obligation equals the Fourteenth Amendment's.
Northeastern Florida Chapter of the Associated General Contractors of America v. City of Jacksonville
An association of contractors has standing to challenge a minority set-aside ordinance without proving any member would have won a contract absent the ordinance; the injury is denial of equal competitive opportunity, not loss of a specific contract.
Fitzgerald v. Advanced Spine Fixation Systems, Inc.
A manufacturer must indemnify an innocent seller for products liability litigation costs under Texas Civil Practice & Remedies Code § 82.002(a), even if the seller did not sell the particular defective product that injured the plaintiff, provided the seller qualifies as a 'seller' under the statute.
In Re Kellogg Brown & Root, Inc.
The Civil Commitment of Sexually Violent Predators Act is civil, not criminal, and does not violate due process even when applied to incompetent defendants.