Asbestos Exclusion Encompasses All Related Claims of Negligence

The Louisiana Appellate Court, Fourth Circuit, applying Louisiana law, affirmed the trial court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of StarStone National Insurance Company (“StarStone”), holding that plaintiff Tuna Construction LLC’s (“Tuna’s”) insurance policy’s asbestos exclusion applied to all related claims, and thus StarStone did not have a duty to defend Tuna.

Tuna subcontracted under StarStone policyholder V. Keeler & Associates (“Keeler”) for the construction of a school and was listed as an additional insured on Keeler’s policy. The construction project involved asbestos abatement work, which fell within Keeler’s StarStone policy’s asbestos exclusion. The policy exclusion stated that “any suit or claim against any insured… [arising]” out of asbestos-related work was exempt from coverage.

The school, Choice Foundation, filed suit against Tuna and Keeler, as well as other contractors, for damages related to asbestos contamination. Tuna argued that since the claims of asbestos contamination were accompanied by other claims of general negligence that were allegedly not excluded, StarStone had a duty to defend Tuna.

The trial court held that StarStone did not have a duty to defend Tuna, which the Appellate Court affirmed. The Appellate Court held that since each claim arose out of Tuna’s asbestos-related negligence and contamination, the asbestos exclusion was applicable to all claims. As such, StarStone did not have a duty to defend Tuna. Choice Found. v. L. Indus., LLC, 2021-0431 (La. App. 4 Cir. Mar. 2, 2022).

The Louisiana Appellate Court, Fourth Circuit, applying Louisiana law, affirmed the trial court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of StarStone National Insurance Company (“StarStone”), holding that plaintiff Tuna Construction LLC’s (“Tuna”) insurance policy’s asbestos exclusion applied to all related claims, and thus StarStone did not have a duty to defend Tuna.

Tuna subcontracted under StarStone policyholder V. Keeler & Associates (“Keeler”) for the construction of a school and was listed as an additional insured on Keeler’s policy. The construction project involved asbestos abatement work, which fell within Keeler’s StarStone policy’s asbestos exclusion. The policy exclusion stated that “any suit or claim against any insured… [arising]” out of asbestos-related work was exempt from coverage.

The school, Choice Foundation, filed suit against Tuna and Keeler, as well as other contractors, for damages related to asbestos contamination. Tuna argued that since the claims of asbestos contamination were accompanied by other claims of general negligence that were allegedly not excluded, StarStone had a duty to defend Tuna.

The trial court held that StarStone did not have a duty to defend Tuna, which the Appellate Court affirmed. The Appellate Court held that since each claim arose out of Tuna’s asbestos-related negligence and contamination, the asbestos exclusion was applicable to all claims. As such, StarStone did not have a duty to defend Tuna. Choice Found. v. L. Indus., LLC, 2021-0431 (La. App. 4 Cir. Mar. 2, 2022).