Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 30 NOVEMBER 2017

State Appeals Courts Rule On ‘That Particular Part' Exclusions

Two recent cases from separate California state courts correctly interpret the phrase "that particular part" and apply it in its intended narrow sense.

United StatesReal Estate and Construction

Two recent cases from separate California state courts correctly interpret the phrase "that particular part" and apply it in its intended narrow sense. This is good news for contractors and is in contrast to some recent decisions by federal courts.

In Pulte Home Corp. v. American Safety Indemn. Co., 14 Cal. App. 5th 1086, (2017), American Safety Indemn. Co. (ASIC) denied a defense to general contractor Pulte under several policies it had issued to three subcontractors who worked on two projects, both of which led to construction defect lawsuits against Pulte and the subcontractors. Pulte claimed coverage for the defense of the suits under additional insured endorsements attached to each of the policies.

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from