Case Briefs

According to a recent decision by the New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division, an insurer is not necessarily equitably estopped from disclaiming coverage to an insured ' even years after the commencement of underlying litigation ' so long as the insured was not prejudiced by the delay. In 206-208 Main Street Associates, Inc. v. Arch Insurance Company, 2013 WL 1831452 (N.Y. App. Div. May 2, 2013), the plaintiff, doing business as Sutphin Blvd., LLC (“Sutphin”), hired H&H Builders, Inc. (“H&H”) to act as construction manager on a project to construct an office and retail building. H&H procured a CGL insurance policy from defendant Arch naming Sutphin as an additional insured.

During construction, on Aug. 30, 2007, the foundation of a building adjacent to the construction cracked, causing it to collapse and damage surrounding buildings. H&H notified Arch within several days of the incident. H&H was subsequently named in at least four actions beginning in October 2007, including one commenced by Sutphin that alleged the incident was caused by, among other things, “excavation work, underpinning [and] soil testing ' [that was] negligent.” Id. at *1. Arch retained a law firm to defend H&H in each of the actions.