Panfil v. Nautilus Ins. Co.

Dist. Ct. did not err in granting plaintiff-insured’s motion for summary judgment in action alleging that defendant-insurance company breached terms of general commercial liability policy by failing to defend plaintiff in underlying action by employee of subcontractor, who was injured while performing insulation work at insured’s property. While “Employee Exclusion” clause in policy supported defendant’s contention that instant accident was not covered event, policy’s “Contractor-Subcontracted Work Endorsement” provided coverage for work “being performed specifically and solely for you.” As such, policy contained ambiguity with respect to coverage that must be resolved in favor of providing coverage, where defendant had drafted terms of policy.