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

PERFORMANCE FIBERS, INC. v. ACE AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY

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: 
2:12-cv-04852 Search Pacer
Court Type: 
Federal
US District Court: 
Eastern District of Pennsylvania
Date Filed: 
Aug 23 2012

"FIRST CLAIM FOR RELIEF (Breach of Contract)

30. Performance Fibers incorporates by reference paragraphs 1 through 29 as though fully set forth herein.

31. The Policy provides coverage for all loss that Performance Fibers suffers as a result of damage to property that prevented BP from supplying PTA to Performance Fibers.

32. The April 27, 2011 damage to property prevented BP from supplying PTA to Performance Fibers. The property damage affected BP’s ability to supply PTA, whether from the Cooper River Facility, the Decatur Facility, or both.

33. ACE has refused to pay Performance Fibers’ losses allegedly due to PTA that BP could not supply from the Cooper River Facility, ostensibly because the Cooper River Facility did not suffer physical damage at its location. ACE also has improperly calculated any applicable deductibles under the Policy, resulting in an under-calculation of the amount of Performance Fibers’ amount of insured loss under the Policy.

34. ACE’s refusal to pay the proper amount of Performance Fibers’ losses constitutes a breach of the Policy. Performance Fibers has been damaged as a direct result of ACE’s breaches in an amount to be determined at trial, but such amount totals in the millions of dollars.

35. Performance Fibers is entitled to all direct, indirect, consequential, special, compensatory and other damages resulting from ACE’s breach of contract.

SECOND CLAIM FOR RELIEF (Declaratory Judgment)

36. Performance Fibers incorporates by reference paragraphs 1 through 35 as though fully set forth herein.

37. This is a claim for declaratory judgment pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 2201 and 2202. Performance Fibers and ACE may have further disagreements concerning the interpretation of the Time Element Extensions coverage in the Policy and the extent of Performance Fibers’ loss that is covered under such coverage provisions. Accordingly, Performance Fibers seeks a declaration that ACE is obligated, pursuant to the terms of its insurance contract, to pay otherwise covered loss that results from property damage that prevents a supplier from rendering its goods and/or services, and the Policy does not restrict coverage to only those losses attributable to a location that itself has been physically damaged.

38. Performance Fibers requests that this Court declare and order as follows:
(a) That the Policy insures Performance Fibers’ losses that resulted from BP’s inability to supply PTA after the April 27, 2011 events;
(b) That the Policy insures loss that results from property damage that prevents a supplier from rendering its goods and/or services, and the Policy does not limit coverage to property damage at any particular location of the supplier;
(c) That the Policy does not restrict coverage for Performance Fibers’ losses to only those losses that resulted from BP’s inability to render PTA from the Decatur Facility specifically;
(d) That if Performance Fibers’ losses are covered under the Time Element Extensions and one or more other coverages provided by the Policy, then only one deductible shall apply, and ACE is not entitled to apply multiple deductibles under multiple coverages.

39. The foregoing declarations are based on the language of the Policy that is the subject of this action.

40. An actual controversy exists between Performance Fibers and ACE regarding the rights and obligations of the parties.

41. The issuance of declaratory relief by this Court will terminate some or all of the existing controversy between the parties."

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.