Hartford Fire Insurance v. Tempur-Sealy International, Inc.

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

Re: Dkt. Nos. 53,

Pending before the Court are the parties’ cross-motions for summary judgment. For the reasons stated below, Plaintiffs motion is DENIED and Defendants’ motion is GRANTED.

*880 I. BACKGROUND

The following material facts are not in dispute.

A. Insurance Policies

Plaintiff Hartford Fire Insurance Co. issued nine comprehensive general liability insurance policies to Defendants Tempur-Sealy International, Inc. and Tempur-Pedic North America, LLC, covering the time period from December 31, 2004 to March 1, 2013 ("Policies”). 1 See Dkt. No. 56 (“Maynard Decl.”), Exs. 1-9. The “Insuring Agreement” section of the Policies reads:

Section I ¶ 1(a).

The promised coverage encompasses “bodily injury” and “property damage” only if, in relevant part, the “bodily injury” or “property damage” is caused by an “occurrence.” Id. ¶ 1(b)(1). “Bodily injury” is defined as “bodily injury, sickness or disease sustained by a person, including mental anguish or death resulting from any of these at any time.” Section V ¶ 5. “Property damage” is defined as (1) “[pjhysical…