Centex Homes v. Everest National Insurance Company et al

Filing 42

ORDER. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the parties must each file a brief by 7/3/2017, not to exceed ten pages, discussing whether the exclusions are relevant to 19 Defendant's Motion with regard to Plaintiff's breach of contract claim. Signed by Chief Judge Gloria M. Navarro on 6/18/17. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - MR)

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

2

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

3
CENTEX HOMES,
4
5
6
7
8

Plaintiff,
vs.
EVEREST NATIONAL INSURANCE
COMPANY, et al.,
Defendants.

9
10

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No.: 2:16-cv-01275-GMN-PAL
ORDER

Pending before the Court is the Motion to Dismiss, (ECF No. 19), filed by Defendant

11

Lexington Insurance Company (“Defendant”). Plaintiff Centex Homes (“Plaintiff”) filed a

12

Response, (ECF No. 28), and Defendant filed a Reply, (ECF No. 34). The commercial general

13

liability (“CGL”) policies at issue in this case include the following language:

14
15
16
17

A. Section II –Who Is An Insured is amended to included as an
insured [Plaintiff], but only with respect to liability arising out of
your on-going operations performed for that insured.
B. With respect to the insurance afforded to these additional
insureds, the following exclusion is added:

18

2. Exclusions

19

This insurance does not apply to “bodily injury” or “property
damage” occurring after:

20
21
22
23
24
25

(1) All work, including materials, parts or equipment
furnished in connection with such work, on the project (other
than service, maintenance or repairs) to be performed by or
on behalf of the additional insured(s) at the site of the
covered operations has been completed; or
(2) That portion of “your work” out of which the injury or
damage arises has been put to its intended use by any person
or organization other than another contractor or
Page 1 of 2

subcontractor engaged in performing operations for a
principal as a part of the same project.

1
2
3

(Ex. 1 to Def.’s App. at 7–8, ECF No. 20-1); (see also Ex. 2 to Def.’s App. at 8–9, ECF No. 20-

4

2).

5
6
7

The parties’ briefing on Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss does not discuss the two
exclusions to the additional insured endorsement noted above. Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the parties must each file a brief by July 3, 2017, not

8

to exceed ten pages, discussing whether the exclusions are relevant to Defendant’s Motion

9

with regard to Plaintiff’s breach of contract claim.

10

June
18
DATED this _____ day of May, 2017.

11
12
13

___________________________________
Gloria M. Navarro, Chief Judge
United States District Court

14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25

Page 2 of 2