BROADCASTS.com

b'

Ambiguous Policy Wording Results in Adoption of Continuous Trigger of \\nCoverage\\n\\nThe United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit certified a \\nquestion to the Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia\\xa0 asking: "[a]t\\n what point in time does bodily injury occur to trigger insurance \\ncoverage for claims stemming from chemical exposure or other analogous \\nharm that contributed to the development of a latent illness?"\\n\\nIn Westfield Insurance Company v. Sistersville Tank Works, Inc.; et al, \\nNo. 22-848, Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia (November 8, 2023)\\n the Court answered the question.\\xa0 The Supreme Court answered the \\nquestion with the conclusion that a "continuous-trigger" theory applies \\nto the policy, as the policy is ambiguous as to when coverage is \\ntriggered.\\n\\nOPINION\\n\\nThe gateway to coverage under every standardized, commercial general \\nliability (or "CGL") policy issued in the United States since 1966 is \\nproof that a bodily injury or property damage has "occurred."\\n\\nFACTUAL BACKGROUND\\n\\nSistersville Tank Works ("STW") has, since late 1984, been a \\nfamily-owned and -operated West Virginia corporation. STW manufactures, \\ninstalls, and repairs various types of tanks at industrial sites \\nthroughout world, including at several chemical plants in West Virginia.\\n\\nAt different points in 2014, 2015, and 2016, three men were diagnosed \\nwith various forms of cancer. In 2016 and 2017, the "claimants" (the men\\n with cancer and/or their spouses) sued STW in three separate lawsuits \\nin West Virginia state courts. The claimants alleged the cancers were, \\nin some part, caused by STW\'s tanks.\\n\\n