Zurich American Insurance Co. v. Infrastructure Engineering, Inc.

This case presents question as to whether trial court properly granted defendant’s motion for summary judgment in plaintiff-insurance company’s subrogation action, seeking recovery from defendant under subrogation clause in builder’s risk insurance policy for money paid to building contractor for water damage done to building allegedly caused by defendant. Complaint alleged that plaintiff stood in shoes of an additional insured under said policy, and trial court based its ruling on belief that plaintiff could not pursue subrogation claim where, as here, plaintiff had not paid any money to additional insured or that additional insured, who had interest in subject building, had suffered any loss. Appellate Court, though, in reversing trial court, found that plaintiff could pursue subrogation action, where subrogation clause in builders risk policy allowed it to pursue claim against entity that allegedly damaged building that resulted in plaintiff paying for said damages. Appellate Court further rejected proposition that general requirements for establishing equitable subrogation controlled over express terms of subrogation clause in policy.