Insurance Company not required to defend personal injury suit

This from my friends at Community Association Management Insider

This must have been a horribly maintained" pool....

Facts: A member was injured as a result of exposure to unsafe sanitary conditions in the community swimming pool. Specifically, the member contracted a viral infection from contaminants in the swimming pool's water. The viral infection was identified as the coxsackie virus, which was contracted from ingesting the community's swimming pool water. According to an expert's report, proper chlorination of swimming pool water is an effective way to kill harmful microbes, including the virus that caused the member's injury.

The member sued the association for damages, and the insurer then asked a judge for a ruling without a trial stating that it had no duty to defend the association against the member's lawsuit. The insurer relied on the language of the association's policy. The policy contained a pollution exclusion that stated that the insurance did not apply to “bodily injury which would not have occurred but for the discharge release or escape of pollutants at any time.” The policy defined “pollutant” to mean any solid, liquid, gaseous contaminant, including smoke, vapor, soot, fumes, acids, alkalis, chemicals, and waste.

Ruling: The Florida district court granted the insurer's request for a judgment without a trial in its favor.

Reasoning: As defined under the plain language of the policy, the meaning of the term pollutant includes contaminant. And the court stated that cases from its jurisdiction have ruled that similar pollutant clauses encompass microbes such as the ones that injured the member. The evidence showed that the substance in the swimming pool was a viral contaminant and a harmful microbe. Therefore, the pollutant exclusion applied in this case.

First Specialty Ins. Corp. v. GRS Mgmt. Assocs., August 2009