Dist. Ct. did not err in granting defendant-insurance company’s motion for summary judgment in action seeking declaration that policy issued by defendant-insurance company covered losses incurred by plaintiff-insured arising out of accident occurring on plaintiff’s construction site. Defendant was entitled to summary judgment to extent plaintiff sought recovery under “Builder’s Risk” provisions of policy, where said provisions limited coverage to losses arising out of plaintiff’s physical structure, and where plaintiff’s economic and consequential losses concerned expenses associated with delay and loss of use of plaintiff’s airport facility. Also, plaintiff was not entitled to receive benefits under policy’s “soft cost” provisions arising out of delay in completion of construction policy, where: (1) coverage was subject to 90-day “delay” deductible; (2) plaintiff’s airport facility actually opened for business within 90 days of scheduled opening date of said facility; and (3) plaintiff failed to identify any “soft costs” in terms of bond interest payments occurring after facility’s opening date. Dist. Ct. erred, though, in granting defendant’s motion for summary judgment with respect to ERAL provisions of policy that covered losses arising out of plaintiff’s attempts to reduce delay in construction project arising out of accident, where: (1) Dist. Ct. improperly found that plaintiff could not receive such expenses in absence of any compensable soft cost claim; and (2) jury question remained as to whether plaintiff incurred additional costs for re-sequencing and accelerating construction project to minimize delay in construction project.
Federal 7th Circuit Court
Civil Court
Insurance