Additional Insured Coverage
Blanket Endorsement

We are pleased to announce that we successfully convinced the Second Department in Burlington Ins. Co. v. Utica First Ins. Co., 2010 NY Slip Op 01906, to reverse the Nassau County trial court’s decision and agree with the First Department’s decision in Rodless Properties v Westchester Fire Insurance Company., 40 A.D.3d 253 (1st Dep’t 2007), that the term “executed”, in a blanket endorsement requiring that there exist a written contract or written agreement “executed” before the date of the loss, means that such written contract must be actually signed or the work fully performed, before the date of the loss, in order to trigger additional insured coverage.

This decision’s effect cannot be understated.  Now, both the First and Second Departments have agreed that contractors cannot, after a loss occurs but work is still ongoing, prepare and sign agreements requiring additional insured coverage and bind the insurers to provide additional insured coverage to entities who would otherwise not qualify for such coverage, thereby preventing “Monday morning quarterbacking” risk transfers.  The decision highlights the need to ask for and review the policies at issue, the pleadings in the underlying action and the contract obligating your named insured to perform work, all before determining whether additional insured coverage is provided.