ARTICLE
8 April 2022

South Carolina Court Of Appeals Finds Coverage For Asbestos Claim Despite Products Hazard And Operations Hazard Exclusion

PD
Phelps Dunbar LLP

Contributor

Phelps is a full-service Am Law 200 law firm, blending valuable traditions and progressive ideas to foster a culture of collaboration among our lawyers in Alabama, Florida, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, and London. The firm’s lawyers handle a broad range of sophisticated business needs regionally, nationally, and internationally.
The South Carolina Court of Appeals found that a Completed Operations Hazard And Products Hazard Exclusion did not bar coverage for a mesothelioma victim exposed to asbestos at home.
United States South Carolina Litigation, Mediation & Arbitration

The South Carolina Court of Appeals found that a Completed Operations Hazard And Products Hazard Exclusion did not bar coverage for a mesothelioma victim exposed to asbestos at home. Covil Corp. v. Pa. Nat'l Mut. Cas. Ins. Co., No. 2020-001239, 2022 S.C. App. LEXIS 1 (S.C. Ct. App. Jan. 5, 2022). 

The insured, an asbestos installer, was sued by an individual who alleged he contracted mesothelioma due to exposure to his step-father who worked for the insured. The exposure was alleged to have occurred at their home. The insured's insurer denied coverage, asserting that the Completed Operations Hazard And Products Hazard Exclusion in the policy barred coverage. The insurer concluded that while it applied to bodily injury that arises out of the insured's product, since the exposure occurred away from the insured's premises after the physical possession of the products had been relinquished, coverage was excluded. 

The court disagreed, and noted that the risk insured by the exclusion is the possibility that the product will cause bodily injury or property damage other than the product or completed work itself. Thus, it concluded that the exclusion applied only when injury was caused by a defective product placed into the stream of commerce, or when the injury was caused by an insured's completed work and that neither had occurred. 

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.

See More Popular Content From

Mondaq uses cookies on this website. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our Privacy Policy.

Learn More