United States Liability Insurance Company v. Benchmark Construction Services, Inc.
United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit
797 F.3d 116 (2015)
- Written by Noah Lewis, JD
Facts
Homeowners hired general-contractor Benchmark Construction Services (Benchmark) (defendant) to renovate their home. The homeowners separately hired architect Thomas Huth. Huth hired Sara Egan to decorate an interior wall. While Egan’s employee Meghan Bailey painted the wall, she fell from a ladder perched on scaffolding. Bailey brought a state-court personal-injury lawsuit against Benchmark alleging it negligently set up the ladder and scaffolding. Benchmark had general liability insurance through United States Liability Insurance Company (USLIC) (plaintiff), so Benchmark asked USLIC to defend it in the lawsuit. USLIC stated that Bailey’s claims were excluded from coverage, so it had no duty to defend Benchmark. An endorsement altered the scope of the coverage laid out in the policy. Although the policy generally covered bodily injury, endorsement L-500 excluded bodily injury to any employee of any contractor or subcontractor arising out of rendering services of any kind for which any insured may become liable in any capacity. USLIC sought a declaratory judgment that the policy excluded Bailey’s claims and that it did not have to defend Benchmark. Benchmark counterclaimed, seeking a declaratory judgment that Bailey’s claims were covered and that USLIC had a duty to defend Benchmark. Following cross-motions for summary judgment, the district court held in favor of USLIC. Benchmark appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Lipez, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 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.