Logourl black
From our private database of 14,100+ case briefs...

SR International Business Insurance Co. v. World Trade Center Properties, LLC

United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
467 F.3d 107 (2006)


World Trade Center Properties, LLC; Silverstein Properties, Inc.; and other companies (Silverstein Parties) (defendants) were entities with property interests in the World Trade Center (WTC). The Silverstein Parties purchased property insurance from SR International Business Insurance Company, Ltd. and other insurance companies (plaintiffs) and were negotiating the final insurance policies when the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 occurred. Those attacks involved two jetliners crashing into the two towers of the WTC, which destroyed both buildings. The insurance companies had issued temporary binders that provided the terms of the interim insurance coverage while the full policies were being negotiated. The temporary binders provided coverage on a per-occurrence basis, but the binders did not define what constituted an occurrence. The Silverstein Parties were entitled to receive up to $3.5 billion for each occurrence. The insurance companies filed a lawsuit, seeking a determination that the terrorist attacks were one occurrence under the temporary binders. Separate motions and trials ensued in district court, resulting in judgments for some of the insurance companies but against some of the other insurance companies. During one of the trials, witnesses were permitted to testify regarding their subjective intent during the contract negotiations. The jury for that trial was given a limiting instruction stating that the testimony of a party’s uncommunicated understanding could not change the meaning of statements and acts communicated to the other party. Several appeals, including a claim that the jury instruction was in error, were filed and consolidated in the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.

Rule of Law

The rule of law is the black letter law upon which the court rested its decision.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.


The issue section includes the dispositive legal issue in the case phrased as a question.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Holding and Reasoning (Walker, J.)

The holding and reasoning section includes:

  • A "yes" or "no" answer to the question framed in the issue section;
  • A summary of the majority or plurality opinion, using the CREAC method; and
  • The procedural disposition (e.g. reversed and remanded, affirmed, etc.).

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.

Here's why 220,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,100 briefs, keyed to 189 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.