The court found the contractor did not have coverage as an additional insured under the subcontractor's policy. Walton Constr. v. First Fin. Ins. Co., 2015 US. Dist. LEXIS 30710 (E.D. La. March 12, 2015).
John Maestri was injured while working on a construction project for the Jefferson Parish School Board. Maestri was a commercial glazier for A-1 Glass Services Inc. A-1 was a subcontractor for Walton Construction. While Maestri was installing glass on the project, a high-voltage power line maintained by Entergy Louisiana, LLC electrocuted him, causing burns on his body.
Maestri sued Entergy. Entergy filed a third-party complaint against A-1 and Walton, alleging that the Louisiana Overhead Power Line Safety Act had been violated by failing to give advance notice that their workers would be working near the power lines. Entergy argued that under the statute, A-1 and Walton are liable for any damages that Entergy had to pay Maestri.
Walton was an additional insured under A-1's CGL policy with First Financial. The policy included as an additional insured any organization with whom A-1 agreed to provide insurance, but only "with respect to liability for 'bodily injury' . . . caused by 'your work' or maintenance, operations or use of facilities owned or sued by [A-1]." The policy also excluded coverage for bodily injury to an employee of any insured.
Coverage was denied and Walton sued First Financial. First Financial moved for summary judgment. The court first noted that Maestri was an employee of A-1, an insured. Therefore, the policy excluded coverage for damages for his bodily injury. Further, the policy covered damages for "physical injury", not damages for statutory violations.
Accordingly First Financial had no duty to defend or indemnify Walton against Entergy's third-party complaint in the underlying suit.