More on Whitaker

In my last posts, here, and here, I have been discussing Whitaker Corp. v. Am. Nuclear Insurers, 2009 WL 4342512 (D. Mass.), a case involving insurance coverage for property owners of a superfund site.

In my last post I discussed the facility form, under which the court held that coverage was initially triggered.

The facility form contained "Endorsement 112," which provided that the insurer, ANI, would pay "all sums which the insured shall become legally obligated to pay because of bodily injury or property damage, or as covered environmental cleanup costs because of environmental damages."

Covered damages were defined as "damages because of bodily injury or property damage to which this policy applies; but covered damages do not included environmental cleanup costs or on-site cleanup costs."

The court discussed defined terms in the last phrase and held that it excluded coverage for the environmental clean up costs.

This is not the end of it, however. Stay tuned . . .