panadiva.blogg.se

Us v great lakes dredge and dock
Us v great lakes dredge and dock













us v great lakes dredge and dock

replaced the pilings ("dolphins") protecting the Kinzie Street Bridge. Events were set in motion in August and September 1991, when Great Lakes Dredge Dock Co.

us v great lakes dredge and dock

  • The Chicago Flood of 1992 occurred when the Chicago River sprung a leak and drained into a tunnel system connecting many buildings in the Loop.
  • By requiring the London Insurers to provide an extra $500,000 in indemnity and (almost) $500,000 in defense expenses, the district court sought to put Chicago in the position it would have occupied had the London Insurers recognized that under this policy they owed to Chicago the same duties they owed to Great Lakes.

    us v great lakes dredge and dock

    Because the London Insurers paid out the policy limits on behalf of Great Lakes, Chicago received none of the benefit even though it was an insured. The London Insurers did not tarry in recognizing their obligation to defend and indemnify Great Lakes, but recognizing the obligation to Chicago, which was not named on the face of the policy, took additional time. Nonetheless, the district judge ordered the London Insurers to pony up an extra $500,000 in indemnity and an additional $495,000 in defense outlays as penalties for bad-faith failure to treat Chicago as an additional insured - which it was, by virtue of its contract with Great Lakes and a clause in the policy promising indemnity to Great Lakes' customers. The London Insurers disbursed the policy limit of indemnity and expended the full $1 million in legal costs on behalf of Great Lakes. The primary $1 million policy had a separate limit of $1 million for legal expenses incurred in defense of claims made against the insured.















    Us v great lakes dredge and dock