Legarra v. Federated Mutual Insurance

How courts have described this case

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

• find-ing that, given the format of the policy, an insured would reasonably expect the pollution exclusion to apply only to coverage for bodily injury and property damage, despite the lack of specific reference in the pollution exclusion to bodily injury and property damage
• granting summary judgment upon finding that underlying lawsuit fell squarely within the pollution exclusion and as such insurer had no duty to defend where evidence established as a matter of law there was no coverage
• absolute pollution exclusion barred coverage for remediating gasoline contamination of groundwater by petroleum bulk plant
• groundwater contamination by gasoline leak not a covered personal injury as defined in the policy because it clearly fell within the pollution exclusion clause and to allow coverage defeated the policy language

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).