From our private database of 28,500+ case briefs...
American Home Products Corporation v. Liberty Mutual Insurance Company
United States District Court for the Southern District of New York
565 F. Supp. 1485 (1983)
Facts
American Home Products Corporation (AHPC) (plaintiff) had an insurance policy with Liberty Mutual Insurance Company (Liberty) (defendant) from 1944 until 1976. AHPC manufactured, among other things, pharmaceuticals. AHPC was subject to 54 lawsuits arising from physical harm related to those pharmaceuticals. This physical harm did not manifest until after AHPC’s policy with Liberty had terminated. Thus, Liberty refused to defend or indemnify AHPC in the lawsuits. AHPC’s policy with Liberty covered occurrences that resulted in injuries, sickness, or disease that occurred during the insance policy’s effective period. AHPC’s policy with Liberty was a variation of a comprehensive general-liability policy (CGL). Standard CGLs from the same time period as APHC’s Liberty policy covered any occurrence, defined as accidents and injuries the occurred during the policy period and resulted in bodily injury. AHPC sued Liberty seeking a declaratory judgment that Liberty was required to defend AHPC in the lawsuits, regardless of the date the physical harm manifested, because, AHPC claimed, the exposure that lead to the physical harm occurred during the coverage period.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Sofaer, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 545,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 28,500 briefs, keyed to 983 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.