Gulf Underwriters Insurance v. City of Council Bluffs
2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 135085
S.D. Iowa2010Background
- Multiple insurance coverage disputes arising from underlying malicious prosecution and civil rights actions against the City of Council Bluffs and certain officers.
- Gulf and Travelers seek declaratory judgment that Gulf policies do not cover the Underlying Actions under Iowa law.
- Genesis seeks declaratory judgment that its Genesis policies do not provide coverage for the same set of claims.
- Gulf Primary and Gulf Excess policies include a Law Enforcement Liability Following Form Endorsement tying excess coverage to the underlying Gulf Primary policy.
- Genesis issued two consecutive indemnity policies (2002–2003 and 2003–2004) with different triggers for bodily/personal injury and occurrence.
- Discovery closed; underlying actions focus on pre-policy misconduct in the 1970s and early 1980s with alleged ongoing effects through 2003; hearing held on both summary judgment motions.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether coverage should be determined now vs. after underlying facts develop | Gulf: prematurity lacks merit; defenses based on fully developed records are unfounded | City/Larsen/Brown: coverage should await fuller Underlying Actions record | Timing not premature; court may decide on coverage now |
| Gulf Primary covers only acts during policy period that caused damages | Defendants must show damages sought arise from a wrongful act within 2000–2001 | Claimants' injuries arise from conduct outside Gulf period or are not tied to a wrongful act within period | Gulf does not provide coverage for Underlying Actions under Gulf Primary policy |
| Genesis policies coverage for injuries under Genesis periods | Genesis policies cover injuries occurring during policy period and arising from listed offenses | Injuries occurred in 1970s/early 1980s; precluded under definition of occurrence; no coverage | Genesis policies do not provide coverage for the Underlying Actions |
| When an 'occurrence' for Genesis occurs and accrual of malicious prosecution claims | Injury manifestation timing should align with when damages first manifest | Accrual of malicious prosecutions and pre-policy conduct; continuing injury theory too broad | Injuries manifest by 1978; no Genesis coverage; continuing-injury theory rejected |
Key Cases Cited
- City of Erie v. Int’l Ins. Co., 109 F.3d 156 (3d Cir. 1997) (malicious prosecution coverage and trigger concepts discussed in policy context)
- Weber v. IMT Insurance Co., 462 N.W.2d 283 (Iowa 1990) (defines 'accident' as an unexpected, unintended event for occurrence analysis)
- Tacker v. Am. Family Mut. Ins. Co., 530 N.W.2d 674 (Iowa 1995) (occurrence timing and damages focus in Iowa insurance coverage cases)
- City of Erie v. Guaranty Nat’l Ins. Co., 109 F.3d 156 (3d Cir. 1997) (continues discussion of trigger and discovery in insurance coverage context)
- Billings v. Commerce Ins. Co., 936 N.E.2d 408 (Mass. 2010) (occurrence timing tied to when injurious effects first manifest; malicious prosecution context)