Facing claims that it "allowed a dangerous
substance—mold" to grow in a resident's apartment,
an insured sought coverage under its "businessowners
insurance" coverage. In denying a duty to defend the
underlying wrongful death suit, the insurer relied on two
exclusions: (1) the "Fungi or Bacteria Exclusion" and (2)
the Pollution Exclusion. After analyzing the plain meaning of both
exclusions, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of
Georgia agreed with the insurer, held that it owed no duty to
defend the insured, and granted the insurer's motion for
judgment on the pleadings.
The court began by applying basic principles under Georgia law.
It noted, "[i]f the terms of the insurance contract are plain
and unambiguous, the Court must 'simply [] apply [them] as
written, regardless of whether doing so benefits the carrier or the
insured.'" Reed v. Auto Owners Ins. Co., 284 Ga.
286, 287 (2008). "This rule holds even for policy exclusions,
which 'must be given
