Reidy Contracting Group, LLC v. Mt. Hawley Insurance Company

Summary

The United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit affirmed summary judgment for Reidy Contracting Group, LLC and Merchants Mutual Insurance Company in an insurance coverage dispute involving injuries to subcontractor employees at a construction site. The court held that Reidy qualified as an additional insured under Mt. Hawley Insurance Company's excess policy and that the Employers Liability Exclusion was ambiguous when read with the Separation of Insureds Clause. Applying New York law, the court construed the ambiguity against Mt. Hawley and affirmed the district court's judgment.

Holdings

1. Reidy was an additional insured because the coverage grant covered liability arising out of Vanquish's premises, Vanquish's work for Reidy, or Reidy's acts or omissions in connection with its general supervision of Vanquish's work. The phrase 'in connection with' modified only the nested acts-or-omissions category, not the entire list.
2. The Employers Liability Exclusion was ambiguous when read in the context of the entire policy, including the Separation of Insureds Clause, and therefore was construed against Mt. Hawley. The exclusion did not bar coverage for Reidy because Reidy, the insured seeking coverage, did not employ the injured workers.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Reidy qualified as an additional insured under the Mt. Hawley policy for liability arising out of Vanquish's work.
2. Whether the phrase requiring coverage for acts or omissions of an additional insured 'in connection with' its general supervision of Vanquish's work limited the entire additional-insured coverage grant or only the acts-or-omissions category.
3. Whether the Employers Liability Exclusion unambiguously barred coverage for claims by Vanquish employees against Reidy.
4. Whether Mt. Hawley's challenge to Reidy's additional-insured status was precluded by New York Insurance Law § 3420(d)(2).

Disposition

affirmed