In an October 22, 2010 decision by Justice Kitzes, the court granted an insurance company summary judgment declaring that it did not have to provide a defense or indemnification to a contractor who subcontracted certain of the work.
In 2005 an employee of a plumbing contractor allegedly was injured on the construction project. Over one year later he brought suit against the property owner (who was also the general contractor). The owner brought a third-party indemnification action against DMP Contracting Corp, allegedly the subcontractor responsible for the excavation (who subcontracted work to the injured worker’s employer).
The insurer was granted summary judgment because the express and unambiguous language in the insurance contract provided no coverage for injured worker, because it excluded bodily injury to any of the insured’s contractor or subcontractor.