Legal Opinion · Dissent

Reliance Natl. Ins. v. William Hatfield

Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit

Decided October 10, 2000No. 99-3631, 99-3632Published

1DissentBye, Circuit Judge

The majority holds that the business risk exclusions apply to the additional “completed operations” and “products” coverages purchased by Turbine. Given the particular structure of this policy, I cannot agree. The only insuring agreement, or grant of coverage, that can be found within this policy for those coverages appears in an endorsement — an endorsement that should prevail over the business risk exclusions, not vice versa.

The analytic force of the majority opinion rests on how “completed operations” and “products” coverage is supposed to work, not on how this disputed policy actually…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Fresard v. Michigan Millers Mutual InsuranceMichigan Supreme Court · 1982
  2. Hawkeye-Security Insurance v. Vector Construction Co.Michigan Court of Appeals · 1990
  3. Gaylord Chemical Corp. v. ProPump, Inc.Louisiana Court of Appeal · 2000
  4. Kidd v. Logan M. Killen, Inc.Louisiana Court of Appeal · 1994
  5. Hawkeye-Security Insurance Co. v. DavisMissouri Court of Appeals · 1999

9 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