Legal Opinion · Dissent

Boardman Petroleum, Inc. v. Federated Mutual Insurance

Supreme Court of Georgia

Decided February 23, 1998No. S97Q1883Published

1DissentCarley, Justice

The majority opinion is based upon the erroneous premise that the liability policies issued to Boardman “specifically excluded coverage for underground contamination of property ‘owned or occupied by or rented to the insured.’ ” There is only a general exclusion in the liability policies for “damages” to Boardman’s “owned or rented property.” The question presented for resolution is whether this general exclusion should be construed as a specific exclusion of coverage for Boardman’s liability for underground contamination of its own property. I cannot agree with the majority that this general…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Claussen v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1989
  2. Sentinel Insurance Co. v. First Insurance Co. of Hawai'i, Ltd.Hawaii Supreme Court · 1994
  3. Trustees of Tufts University v. Commercial Union InsuranceMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1993
  4. Paul Patz v. St. Paul Fire & Marine Insurance CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1994
  5. Anderson Development Company, a Michigan Corporation, Cross-Appellee v. Travelers Indemnity CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1995

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API