“AntiSubrogation Rule” Does Not Bar Indemnification Claim

[OK – let me warn you in advance that this one is confusing.]   The City of Johnstown, NY, contracted with Luizzi to do some road paving work.  Luizzi had three existing insurance policies: (a) a CGL policy; (b) an automobile policy; and (c) an umbrella policy.  In addition, in order to do the work for the City, Luizzi obtained a special owners and contractors protective liability policy (“OCP”).  This fourth policy only named the City as an insured (Luizzi was not a named insured under the OCP policy).  All four policies were written by Harleysville.  Mr. Pesta was an employee of Luizzi and was severely injured (his legs were amputated) when he was struck by a dump truck operated by another Luizzi employee.  Pesta sued the City [1]  for his injuries.  The City brought a third-party indemnification claim against Luizzi.


Subrogation Action Does Not Carry Over to Tortfeasor’s Ex-Wife

Husband (“H”) and wife (“W”) went through a bitter divorce, which involved a court proceeding.  H argued that a townhouse complex he owned in his name was his alone and that his wife was not entitled to share in its value.  The Court overseeing the divorce disagreed, and ruled that a townhouse was part of the “marital property” to which W would share.   Tragically, H subsequently used explosives to blow up the townhouse, killing himself in the process.


Court Allows Subrogation Action Against Sprinkler Installer and Inspector

Normally, a lawsuit which claims workers breached a contract must be brought within six (6) years of the date of the breach.  Thus, unfortunately, where a fire is caused by a worker’s wrongful act which occurred many years ago, often times a subrogation breach of contract action is barred by the statute of limitations.  A negligence action, however, can be brought within three (3) years of the date of loss.


Black Sheep Web Design set this site apart from the flock