Peter Syregelas and Haley Loutfy Obtain Favorable Result After Insurer Wrongfully Denied Additional Insured Coverage

In a risk-shifting case for a firm insurer client, Peter Syregelas and Haley Loutfy obtained a favorable settlement after a separate carrier, which insured the subcontractor of our client’s named insured, wrongfully denied additional insured coverage. Upon receipt of the matter, our firm implored the denying insurer to recognize its duty to defend as the exclusion it cited applied only to its named insured and not the additional insured.

Nevertheless, the denying insurer filed a declaratory judgment suit, and in doing so, failed to cite its policy’s additional insured endorsement which did not extend the exclusion it relied on to the additional insured. After more than a year in court, full briefing on cross-motions for summary judgment, and just prior to oral argument, the denying insurer agreed to defend our client’s named insured with no reservation of rights. The denying insurer also agreed to settle our bad faith claim and pay the vast majority of money our client spent in the declaratory judgment action.

Our client will be paid all of the past fees it incurred in the underlying case, nearly all of its fees paid in the insurance coverage suit, and the denying insurer will defend and indemnify the additional insured going forward.