The following excerpt is from City of Burlington v. Indemnity Ins. Co., 332 F.3d 38 (2nd Cir. 2003):
The City's complaint sought damages from five separate insurance companies, each of which had insured the generator at one time or another between its installation and the initiation of the suit. The defendants each moved and the City cross-moved for summary judgment. The district court analyzed the policies separately and concluded, for different reasons in each case, that none covered the City's claimed losses. See City of Burlington v. Hartford Steam Boiler Inspection and Ins. Co., 190 F.Supp.2d 663 (D.Vt.2002). The City appeals only the ruling on the Indemnity Policies.
The court held that coverage was precluded by the Policies' "inherent vice" and "latent defect" exclusions.
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.