Ayersman v. West Virginia Division of Environmental Protection

(Filed Jan. 12, 2001)

While I agree with the majority that this case should be reversed, I would reverse for different reasons. In my view the issues of the definition of pollution or the sufficiency of the circuit judge’s actions are red herrings.

At issue in this case is an insurance policy for the DEP that purports, on its face, to exclude coverage for pollution abatement work. This sort of exclusion might make sense for a standard commercial or industrial policy where, for example, an insurer wishes to avoid liability for the removal of asbestos from a insured company’s older manufacturing…