In COSTCO Wholesale Corp. v. Arrowood Indem. Co., NO. C17-1212RSL, 2019 WL 1330455 (W.D. Wash. March 25, 2019), a federal judge applied the express terms of an excess liability insurance policy. Of course, the federal judge also described the excess carrier's coverage as one "tower" of power, but that did not stop him from reading the policy.
The federal judge applied the particular carrier's excess insurance policy language to hold: First, that both the policyholder's, COSTCO's, and the carrier's, Arrowood's, respective motions for summary judgment were both granted in part and denied in part.
Second, Arrowood showed "no basis on which that amount [of Arrowood's payment toward an underlying settlement] should be reimbursed."
Third, the Court found that "the post-settlement arbitration costs paid by Arrowood - including mediator expenses, expert fees, and attorney’s fees - are recoverable “Loss” as long as they are reasonable, and the record does not support a finding that any particular invoice or portion of an invoice was unreasonable."
Finally, COSTCO was held not to be "entitled to recover expenses incurred on programmatic relief, however, or its attorney’s fees in this coverage litigation. Neither party is entitled to summary judgment on Costco’s tort and statutory claims."
COSTCO Wholesale Corp. v. Arrowood Indem. Co., NO. C17-1212RSL, 2019 WL 1330455, at *10 (W.D. Wash. March 25, 2019).
So, there you have it. No tower of power. Only judicial interpretation of insurance policy language, even the language of an insurance policy issued by an excess carrier. When it comes to judicial interpretation, hanging out in a tower is not a good escape.
Please Read The Disclaimer. ©2019 Dennis J. Wall. All Rights Reserved.
Comments