A federal court in South Carolina held that a nuisance lawsuit based on noise failed to allege an "occurrence" or property damage under a CGL policy. Liberty Corporate Capital v. Palmetto Bluff Shooting Club, No. 9:19-CV-00521-SAL, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 163768 (D.S.C. Aug. 24, 2021).
The insurer sued its insured, a shooting club, to determine whether it had a duty to defend a nuisance lawsuit brought by homeowners surrounding the club premises due to noise from the club. In a motion for summary judgment, the insurer argued that there was no coverage and no duty to defend because the nuisance litigation did not assert an "occurrence" or property damage that would trigger the policy's insuring agreement.
The court noted that South Carolina courts have found that activity that is intentional and deliberate does not constitute an accident. It noted further that where an act causes damage that is the natural consequence of the action, it is not an accident and consequently not an "occurrence." The court found that the alleged nuisance, the noise from the shooting club, was the normal consequences of the shooting club's activities; i.e., shooting, and did not constitute an accident and granted the insurer's motion for summary judgment.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
