Queen City Farms, Inc. v. Central Nat'l Ins. Co. of Omaha

(dissenting) — Washington courts have pursued a tortured analysis of the qualified pollution exclusion; they have labeled this exclusion ambiguous and have eliminated it from insurance policies altogether. Jacquelyn A. Be-atty, Exclusions Exclude: Let the Pollution Mean What It Says, 28 Gonz. L. Rev. 401, 409 (1992-1993). Unfortunately, the result of the majority’s decision today perpetuates and even extends this tortured interpretation of the pollution exclusion in the face of substantial, persuasive authority to the contrary.

While I disagree with nearly every holding by the majority, I will…