9-11 Collapse of WTC Towers Was One Occurrence

There is a good discussion of the 2d Circuit's decision in the WTC case here. From what is posted about the decision here, it sounds like the insured was hoisted on his own petard, because he inserted a manuscript definition of occurrence to reduce the likelihood of having to pay two SIRs, only to find that the same definitional language resulted in a finding of only one occurrence for purposes of the policy limits.

I like the way May It Please The Court is integrated with the look and design of the host law firm's site. This blog doesn't seem to use Blogger, Moveable Type, or Radio Userland blog software, but instead appears to use Web Wiz Journal, which seems to work perfectly fine. However, it requires the site to be on a host that offers ASP.

The Declarations and Exclusions blog also covered the WTC ruling.

Addendum:

To me this decision is interesting because it illustrates how the terms of coverage are determined during the period after the policy "binder" has been issued, but before the full policy has been issued.

The Second Circuit has this to say about the insured's efforts to reduce the potential deductibles:

[U]ntil the total destruction of the WTC on September 11th, it was in Silverstein Properties’ interest to incorporate into their insurance coverage a definition of “occurrence” that would minimize the number of “occurrences” in order to minimize the number of deductibles that would apply in the event of a loss or series of losses. This goal was accomplished by the WilProp form’s inclusive definition of “occurrence.” When Travelers held out for using its own form in its negotiations with Willis in August 2001, Timothy Boyd, a vice president of Willis, reported that fact to a co-broker, stating, “Although other players have signed binders based on WilProp, Travelers is insisting we use their form and this is under review.” Apart from its potential as a party admission, the statement that “players [other than Travelers] have signed binders based on WilProp,” made by the Silverstein Parties’ agent on August 3, 2001 — after the binders were in place and before the WTC was destroyed — is consistent with our review of the binder negotiations, to which we now turn.

It is also interesting that the litigation over the definition of "occurrence" will apparently continue with respect to the coverage issued by Travelers, which conceivably could still lose on the issue of whether there was one or two occurrences. It's not clear how much exposure for Travelers rests on the ultimate finding on the number of occurrences here.