Hiland Partners GP Holdings v. National Union Fire Insurance, No. 15-3936 (8th Cir. 2017)Annotate this Case
Hiland filed suit against National Union, alleging that National Union had a duty to defend and indemnify it in connection with a lawsuit arising from an explosion at its natural gas processing facility. The district court entered summary judgment for National Union. The court concluded that National Union did not have a duty to defend or indemnify Hiland because the allegations in the underlying complaint fell within the policy's pollution exclusion. The court also concluded that, because Hiland did not offer specific facts showing that it reported the pollution to National Union within twenty one days, the district court did not err by concluding that the exception to the exclusion did not apply. Accordingly, the court affirmed the judgment.
Court Description: Murphy, Author, with Kelly, Circuit Judge, and Montgomery, District Judge] Civil case - Insurance. The district court did not err in finding the insurer was relieved of its duty to defend and indemnify by reason of the pollution exclusion in the underlying policy as the injury giving rise to the claim was caused by the explosion of condensate, a contaminant and pollutant covered by the pollution exclusion.