In Burlington v. NYC Transit Auth., 29 N.Y.3d 313, 317 (2017), the Court of Appeals held that where an additional insured (AI) endorsement on a Commercial General Liability (CGL) policy is “restricted to liability for any bodily injury caused in whole or in part by the acts or omissions of the named insured, the coverage applies to injury proximately caused by the named insured.”

The case was a significant change from longstanding appellate case law which had previously held that, where the named insured’s employee was injured, the employment relationship alone was sufficient to trigger AI coverage for endorsements with this wording, which includes most of the current 04 13 and 12 19 Insurance Service Organization (ISO) forms. See Julian D. Ehrlich, “Readjusting Risk Transfer” NYLJ (June 12, 2017).

This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.

To view this content, please continue to their sites.

Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]