The Delaware Superior Court found the insurer had a duty to indemnify the additional insured for settlement proceeds in a wrongful death suit. Premcor Ref. Group v. Matrix Serv. Indus. Contrs., 2013 Del. Super. LEXIS 517 (Del. Super. Ct. Nov. 18, 2013).

   Premcor hired Pro-Tech to coordinate work at an oil refinery. Pro-Tech was to provide a safe workplace. Pro-Tech also agreed to have Premcor named as an additional insured in its liability policy with Maryland Casualty. The policy defined additional insureds to include others with respect to liability arising out of Pro-Tech's work. 

   One evening, a Pro-Tech employee was supervising workbeing performed in a reactor. Two workers were asphyxiated to death when they entered the nigrogen-filled reactor. As a result, two lawsutis were filed by the estates of the decedents, alleging Premcor was negligent when Pro-Tech's night representative failed oversee the safety of the work. 

   Premcor settled the two lawsuits and sued Maryland Casualty, seeking indemnification, contribution, and additional coverage for the underlying lawsuits. The court previously found Maryland Casualty had no duty to defend because Pro-Tech was not specifically named in the underlying suits. 

   Now, however, the Court ruled that Maryland Casualty had a duty to indemnify. The deaths "arose out of" Pro-Tech's work. Pro-Tech had agreed to oversee the workspace, give assignments to each worker, and oversee the general safety of the workplace. The Pro-Tech employee who was on duty had safety knowledge of the workplace. Therefore, there was a meaningful link between the two deaths and Pro-Tech's work at the site, making Premcor an additional insured under the Maryland Casualty policy. As a result Maryland Casualty had a duty to indemnify Premcor.