Energy Ins. Mut. Ltd. v. Ace Am. Ins. Co.

Good Law
14 Cal. App. 5th 281·2017 Cal. App. LEXIS 696·221 Cal. Rptr. 3d 711·2017 WL 3476705
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJuly 11, 2017A140656California9,294 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Reardon, J.

*285 This insurance coverage dispute arises from a massive explosion that occurred when an unmarked petroleum pipeline was struck by an excavator. Numerous lawsuits were filed against a range of defendants, including the pipeline owner and the staffing agency providing personnel to the pipeline. After settling the lawsuits against the pipeline owner, an excess insurer for the pipeline sought to recover defense costs and settlement payments from the staffing agency's insurer. The staffing agency's excess insurance policy excluded damages arising from professional services. We *286 affirm summary judgment in favor of the staffing agency's insurer, finding the policy excluded the claims in the underlying lawsuits.

I. BACKGROUND

A. The Parties and the Underlying Actions

Kinder Morgan, Inc., together with its affiliated companies (Kinder Morgan), owns and operates thousands of miles of oil and gas pipelines. Kinder Morgan was insured under an "Excess Liability Insurance Policy" by Associated Electric & Gas Insurance Services Limited (AEGIS) with a liability limit of $35 million per occurrence, subject to a self-insured retention (SIR) 1 of $1 million per occurrence for "General…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.