Marriott entered a franchise agreement with Columbia Hotels.  See Marriott Int'l, Inc. v. Amoco Ins. Co., 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 53253 (W.D. Mo. May 28, 2010).  In the agreement, Columbia agreed to "indemnify, defend and save harmless Marriott against all losses, damages, claims, . . . arising out of . . . the Franchised Business."  Columbia's duty to indemnify Marriott would survive if the franchise agreement was terminated.  Finally, Columbia agreed to obtain a CGL policy naming Marriott as an additional insured.  Columbia purchased such a policy from AMCO with a policy period from April 3, 2007 to April 3, 2008.  The policy stated coverage ended when the franchise agreement was terminated.

   The franchise agreement was terminated on November 19, 2007.  The termination agreement stated the rights of Marriott and the duties and obligations of Columbia would remain in full force and effect and survive the termination date. 

   Five days after termination of the franchise, a Columbia employee was raped and murdered.  Her son filed suit against Marriott and others.  Marriott sought a defense from AMCO, which denied coverage.  Marriott then sued AMCO and Columbia.  Columbia cross-claimed against AMCO.

   The court initially determined that the indemnity provision should be interpreted under Maryland law.  Based upon Maryland's treatment of indemnity provisions, the franchise agreement did not cover Marriott for its own negligence.  Although the indemnity provision covered "all losses, damages, claims," etc., the parties did not use specific language manifesting an intent to cover Marriott's own negligence.  Without such language, the indemnity provision would not cover Marriott's own negligence. 

   Nor was Marriott entitled to coverage by AMCO as an additional insured.  The policy classified Marriott as an additional insured due to the franchise agreement with Columbia, but only for as long as the franchisee agreement lasted.  The franchise agreement ended five days before the rape and murder.  Thereafter, Marriott lost its protection as an additional insured.  Accordingly, Marriott was not entitled to coverage by AMCO as an additional insured.