Travelers Casualty & Surety Company v. Certain Underwriters at Lloyd’s of London
Court of Appeals of New York
760 N.E.2d 319 (2001)
Travelers Casualty & Surety Company (Travelers) (plaintiff) provided primary, excess, and umbrella general-liability insurance to chemical manufacturers the Koppers Company (Koppers) and E.I. DuPont de Nemours & Company (DuPont). Travelers obtained catastrophic excess of loss reinsurance from Certain Underwriters at Lloyd’s of London (Lloyds) and other foreign reinsurance companies (defendants) for the excess-loss insurance policies. Travelers’ reinsurance treaties with the defendants for both the DuPont and Koppers policies contained similar language. These treaties required the defendants to pay Travelers for “each and every loss” incurred. “Each and every loss” included all losses arising from one “disaster and/or casualty.” “Disaster and/or casualty” included “each and every accident, occurrence and/or causative incident” and grouped losses arising from a “series” of accidents or occurrences into one loss. The treaties also included a “follow the fortunes” clause requiring that the defendants pay their share of Travelers’ settlements to Travelers upon a showing that Travelers paid these settlements. Environmental actions were brought against Koppers and DuPont arising from improper disposal of hazardous waste. Koppers sued Travelers seeking a declaration that Travelers was required to defend and indemnify Koppers, and Travelers settled with Koppers. Travelers treated the entire settlement as one disaster and/or casualty because the settlement arose from a common origin and could be traced to one act, namely Koppers’ improper waste disposal. Travelers sued the defendants seeking monetary damages and declaratory relief. DuPont sued Travelers seeking a declaratory judgment that Travelers must cover claims arising from pollution at hazardous waste sites. Travelers settled and sought reimbursement from the defendants. Travelers treated the entire settlement as one disaster and/or casualty. Travelers sued the defendants seeking monetary damages and declaratory relief. The defendants moved for summary judgment in both the Koppers and the DuPont lawsuits. The trial court granted the defendants’ motion. Travelers appealed.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (Graffeo, J.)
What to do next…
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.
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 175,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,000 briefs, keyed to 188 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.