Ashlyn M. Capote, an associate in the firm’s Global Insurance Services practice, wrote an article discussing the “plain-meaning” approach when it comes to analyzing priority of coverage.

In “An Overview of Recent Priority of Coverage Decisions,” Ashlyn provides numerous examples of cases that follow the plain-meaning approach, including opinions in New Jersey and North Carolina. She also talks about how some jurisdictions don’t use the approach, or if they do, its application is often unpredictable.

“Thus, in a typical situation where an owner’s entitlement to insured status under a policy depends on whether the tenant signed a written agreement with the owner wherein the tenant was required to obtain additional insured coverage for the owner, determining if the owner qualifies for additional insured status may be just the first step. If the tenant’s policy also contains language modifying the other insurance provision, then it may be necessary to evaluate the trade agreement between the tenant and the owner to determine whether the tenant was also required to obtain primary and noncontributory coverage for the owner. How states analyze these priority of coverage issues, and specifically the meaning of a primary and noncontributory provision, varies based on the jurisdiction.”

Read the full article here:

“An Overview of Recent Priority of Coverage Decisions,” For The Defense, December 2019

More about Goldberg Segalla’s Ashlyn M. Capote:

Ashlyn M. Capote advises insurers on complex coverage matters and handles insurance coverage litigation throughout New York. She regularly counsels clients on their obligations to provide coverage to insureds under their policies and their ability to seek additional coverages on behalf of their insureds, and she assists with all aspects of coverage litigation, from pleadings and discovery to mediation and settlement negotiation.