Gelman Sciences, Inc. v. Fidelity & Casualty Co.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• suggesting that the trigger theories are methods to simplify the fact-finding process by taking certain shortcuts in determining when injury occurred
• applying an injury-in-fact trigger and determining that several successive policies were triggered when pollution took place at a site over a number of years, thereby causing actual property damage under each policy
• examining the plain language of a policy with language similar to the policies at issue and determining that an injury must occur while a policy is in effect in order for the injury to be subject to indemnity under that policy
• “The standard CGL policy language, providing coverage for property damage occurring during the policy period, unambiguously dictates application of an injuiy-in-fact trigger of coverage.”
• “[W]e must enforce the terms of the contract as written, interpreting the unambiguous language in its plain and easily understood sense.”
• “The manifestation trigger simply is not supported by the policy language.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).