Skip to Navigation
The Collaborative Clearinghouse for Lawsuits and Other Claims Against ACE Group Insurance Companies


ATTENTION: It is possible that this information may no longer be current and therefore may be inaccurate. The index contains both open and closed cases and is not a complete list of cases in which an ACE Insurance Group company is involved. This information is provided to give interested persons an idea of the issues disputed in the indexed cases. For a full understanding of a case, one should read the rest of the court file, including the response. For the most up-to-date and complete information on a case, visit or contact the clerk of the relevant court.

Case Number: 
11-4579 Search Pacer
ACE Group party(s): 
Opposing Party: 
Olin Corporation
Court Type: 
US District Court: 
United States. Court of Appeals (2nd Circuit)
Date Filed: 
Mar 20 1984

"After the Court's initial rulings during a hearing held on March 29, 2011, a jury trial between April 4, 2011 and April 11, 2011, this action proceeded to a bench trial held on May 3, 2011 through May 6, 2011, and on May 31,2011 through June 3, 2011, as well as a subsequent hearing on September 8, 2011, the Honorable Thomas P. Griesa presiding, to adjudicate issues concerning the entitlement ofthe plaintiff, Olin Corporation ("Olin"), to recover on policies of insurance sold to Olin by defendant Century Indemnity Company as successor to Insurance Company ofNorth America ("INA"), in respect of costs and liabilities incurred by Olin in connection with environmental contamination at the Morgan Hill Site located in Morgan Hill, California (the "Morgan Hill Site"). The parties having appeared by their respective attorneys; and proof having been presented on behalf of Olin and INA; the Court having applied the relevant rulings reached during the above-mentioned hearings, jury trial, and bench trial to the defense costs incurred at the Morgan Hill Site, and having expressly determined that there is no just reason for delay, and having expressly directed that final judgment upon certain issues be entered, it is hereby

1. The Court hereby adopts and incorporates by reference, as if set forth in their entirety, the rulings issued in this case addressing Olin's insurance coverage claim against INA with respect to the Morgan Hill Site, except to the extent such rulings were later amended or modified.

2. Olin offered into evidence Exhibit PX 1386 documenting $9,022,681.05 in thirdparty litigation costs in connection with the Morgan Hill Site. Olin has agreed to withdraw $451.46 from this amount and has therefore sought $9,022,229.59 in recoverable defense costs from INA in connection with third-party litigation.

3. INA has raised certain challenges to the amount of defense costs in Olin's claim. Olin and INA have now reached an agreement and stipulated that Olin incurred $8.7 million in defense costs in connection with the third-party litigation. Olin maintains that it is entitled to recover the $8.7 million in stipulated third-party litigation costs in connection with the Morgan Hill Site under the INA Policies. Considering and giving effect to the Court's rulings, the Court finds that Olin is entitled to recover from INA the stipulated third-party litigation costs in the amount of $8.7 million pursuant to the terms of the INA Policies.

4. For all of the reasons enumerated at the hearing of September 8, 2011, the Court determines that Olin is entitled, under N.Y. CPLR § 5001(a), to recover prejudgment interest on the $8.7 million in third-party litigation costs owed under the INA Policies in respect of the Morgan Hill Site.

5. In accordance with all ofthe Court's foregoing rulings, including those articulated on the record on June 3, 2011, and September 8, 2011, the Court hereby expressly directs entry of Judgment for Olin and against INA for third-party litigation costs and prejudgment interest (as provided for under N.Y. CPLR § 5001(a)) as calculated and set forth in the attached Exhibit A,awarding Olin $8.7 million in principal and $5,184,451.66 in interest through September 29,
2011, with an additional $2,145.21 per day from September 29,2011 until this Judgment becomes final. This judgment addresses only Olin's claims against Defendant INA with respect to the Morgan Hill Site, which are fully resolved as the result of the Court's rulings.

6. Under Rule 54(b) ofthe Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the Court expressly determines that there is no just reason for delay in entering final judgment as set forth above. First, Olin's claims against INA with respect to the Morgan Hill Site presented distinct factual and legal issues to the Court. Second, it is in the interest ofthe parties and ofjudicial efficiency to resolve finally the dispute between Olin and INA as to the Morgan Hill Site. Now that Olin's claims and INA's defenses respecting the Morgan Hill Site have been resolved by rulings, trial, or summary judgment, it would be impractical and unfair to all concerned to place those resolved issues on hold until all disputes concerning the remaining sites are resolved. Third, in apparent recognition ofthese principles, the Second Circuit has already approved of entry of various 54(b) judgments in this litigation at particular sites in this case. See Olin Corp. v. Certain
Underwriters at Lloyd's London and London Market Ins. Cos., 347 Fed. App'x 622 (2d Cir. 2009) (taking jurisdiction of 54(b) judgment); Olin Corp. v. Insurance Company of North America, 221 F.3d 307 (2d Cir. 2000) (same); Olin Corp. v. Insurance Company ofNorth Americ~ 966 F.2d 718, 720 (2d Cir. 1992) (same); Olin Corp. v. Insurance Company ofNorth America, 929 F.2d 62,63 (2d Cir. 1991) (same). This judgment is consistent with the prior Rule 54(b) judgments and is entered for similar reasons."

The provided text is an excerpt from a document filed in this case. For a full understanding of the case, one should read the complete court file, including the response.

Javascript is required to view this map.