Is My Drywall Chinese? - HB Litigation Conferences

Cases Interpreting the Pollution
Exclusions (cont’d) (cont d)
Sullins v. Allstate Ins. Co., Co. , 667 A.2d 617, 624
(Md. 1995) – pollution exclusion did not limit
coverage for exposure to lead paint, exclusion
intended to apply to environmental pollution.
Donaldson v. Urban Land Interests, Inc., Inc. , 564
N.W. 2d 728, 732 (Wis. 1997) – pollution
exclusion did not bar coverage when applied to
the buildup of carbon dioxide.
See The Risk Report, Report,
Vol. XXXI, No. 7 (March
2009) Richard J. Scislowski, “A A New Method for
Interpreting Post-1986 Post 1986 Pollution Exclusions.”
Exclusions.
Recent Texas Pollution Exclusion
Decision
Nautilus Ins. Co. v. Country Oaks Apartments
Ltd., Ltd.,
2009 WL 1067587 (5th Cir. Apr. 22, 2009)
held that the total pollution exclusion applied to
buildup of carbon monoxide in apartment.
– The court held that carbon monoxide monoxide was was a pollutant pollutant
as defined by the policy which did not contain an
exception to the exclusion for bodily injury resulting
from fumes or vapor from equipment used to heat or
cool the building.
– The court also held that the carbon monoxide also
was discharged, dispersed, or released into the
apartment.
– Release into the environment was not required.
11
12