ACE AMERICAN INS. CO. v. KEYSTONE CONSTRUCTION & MAINTENANCE SERVICES, INC.
United States District Court, D. Connecticut.
September 27, 2012.
WorleyParsons has also filed a motion to dismiss the strict liability claim and adopts the arguments set forth by other defendants to the extent that they apply. WorleyParsons merely provided engineering services for the construction of the Kleen Plant and accepted Siemens' "system requirements" for gas blows. WorleyParsons did not require the pipes be cleaned through gas blows, or involve itself in the Kleen Plant gas blows. Thus, I grant WorleyParsons' motion to dismiss the strict liability claim.
7. Whether the Subcontractors are Insured by the Plaintiffs
a. Whether the Subcontractors are Additional Insureds
Under the "antisubrogation rule," "an insurer has no right of subrogation against its own insured for a claim arising from the very risk for which the insured was covered." Standard Fire Ins. Co. v. Drummey, No. CV065002071, 2007 WL 361826, at *6 (Conn. Super. Jan. 25, 2007). The question, then, is whether the subcontractors were covered by the plaintiffs' insurance policies.
Kleen's insurance policy with the plaintiffs provided that:
To the extent required by any contract or subcontract for the Insured Project, and then only as their respective interests may appear, all owners, all contractors and subcontractors of every tier, tenants of the INSURED PROJECT, and any other individual or entity specified in such contract or subcontract, are recognized as Additional Insureds hereunder.
Bluewater's Mot. to Dismiss, Ex. B at 21.4 The subcontractors are covered by the plaintiffs' insurance policy, then, to the extent required by the Kleen/O&G Contract. The Kleen/O&G Contract provides that: