You Only Get What You Pay For
Read the full policy at https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/rtfp-insurance-policies-must-interpreted-reading-full-barryand at https://zalma.com/blog plus more than 3600 posts.
On May 1, 2020, Plaintiffs FYT Supplies, Inc. (“FYT”) and Qing Zhang sued (“Coverage Action”) Defendants Nautilus Insurance Company and Daniel Santos. In FYT Supplies, Inc., and Qing Zhang v. Nautilus Insurance Company, and Daniel Santos, Civ. No. 20-6844 (KM) (JBC), United States District Court For The District Of New Jersey (February 1, 2021) Nautilus successfully moved the case to the USDC and then moved to dismiss the Complaint for failure to state a claim.
As I have stated often, insurance is a contract that is interpreted as an entire agreement. If the contract limits its coverage by clear and unambiguous language a court has no choice but to enforce the terms agreed to by the parties to the contract. Since FYT accepted a policy that only provided liability coverage for injuries that occurred at its Brooklyn office and nowhere else. The accident happened in New Jersey and, therefore, Nautilus neither owed defense nor indemnity to FYT.