20.07.2013 Views

Is My Drywall Chinese? - HB Litigation Conferences

Is My Drywall Chinese? - HB Litigation Conferences

Is My Drywall Chinese? - HB Litigation Conferences

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

inadequate ventilation, the court would be less likely to apply the absolute pollution<br />

exclusion than if the cause were the use in the drywall of the fly ash byproduct of burning<br />

coal. In addition, if the chemical compound being emitted from the drywall is a hazardous<br />

substance or a regulated pollutant, it is more likely that the court would apply the absolute<br />

pollution exclusion to the emission of such a substance. See, e.g., American States Ins. Co. v.<br />

Nethery, 79 F.3d 473, 476-77 (5th Cir. 1996) (applying Mississippi law) (trichloroethane in<br />

paint and glue fumes held to be a pollutant within the meaning of the exclusion, in part,<br />

because trichloroethane is regulated as a hazardous substance by EPA under CERCLA). To<br />

the extent, however, that it is shown that the emissions from <strong>Chinese</strong> drywall are the same as<br />

those given off by non-defective drywall, courts may be less inclined to apply the absolute<br />

pollution exclusion to such emissions. As a general matter, courts are less inclined to apply<br />

the absolute pollution exclusion to damage caused by ordinary building materials, installed<br />

by contractors in the ordinary course of their business, than to other types of irritants or<br />

contaminants alleged to be within the absolute pollution exclusion.<br />

B. The Other Requirements for Application of the December 2004 Absolute<br />

Pollution Exclusion Might Not Be Met by Particular Insured Contractors.<br />

In order for the absolute pollution exclusion to apply, at least under the December<br />

2004 version of the exclusion, one of five requirements in the exclusion must be met. The<br />

requirements listed at subparts f.(1)(b) and f.(1)(c) of the exclusion are not met by <strong>Chinese</strong><br />

drywall because a house containing such drywall is not a premises, site, or location used for<br />

the handling, storage, disposal, processing or treatment of waste; and the alleged pollutants<br />

were not transported, etc. as waste by or for any insured or any person for whom an insured<br />

is legally responsible. In addition, the requirements at subparts f.(1)(d) and f.(1)(e) of the<br />

- 13 -

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!