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

PACIFIC EMPLOYERS INSURANCE COMPANY v. TRAVELERS CASUALTY AND SURETY COMPANY et al

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 www.pacer.gov or contact the clerk of the relevant court.

Case Number: 
3:11-cv-00924 Search Pacer
ACE Group party(s): 
Opposing Party: 
Pacific Employers Insurance Company
Court Type: 
Federal
US District Court: 
Connecticut District Court
Date Filed: 
Jun 8 2011

"This is a declaratory judgment action to establish whether the defendant insurers owe a defense and potential indemnity to Saint Francis Care, Inc., d/b/a Saint Francis Hospital and Medical Center ("Saint Francis Hospital") in dozens of actions by individuals who were allegedly sexually abused decades ago by George Reardon, an endocrinologist employed previously by Saint Francis Hospital, who is now deceased (the "Reardon Litigation"). Under the applicable policy language, the law, and the facts alleged by the underlying plaintiffs, a failure to prevent sexual abuse, if covered at all, falls under the general liability coverage rather than the professional liability coverage issued to Saint Francis Hospital. The insurer defendants are treating the Reardon claims against the Hospital as professional liability claims, which limits the amount of defense and indemnity coverage available to the Hospital. Based on their characterization of the coverage as it applies to the underlying claims, the defendant insurers have taken the position that the claims fall within the aggregate limit applicable to the professional liability coverage in their respective policies. This action seeks a determination that the claims alleged fall under the general liability coverage issued to the Hospital, and that the amount of coverage cannot be restricted by characterizing the claims as professional liability claims."

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.