| | "Pennsylvania Superior Court, Sitting En Banc, Rules That The Phrase "Sudden And Accidental" In The Standard Pollution ... |
 | | Liberty Mutual denied those requests, contending that under the pollution exclusion clause contained in its policies, it was not required to provide such coverage because the pollution at issue was not caused by a "sudden and accidental event," but rather was caused by a gradual process. |
 | | Regarding Sunbeam's breach of contract claims, the trial court concluded that the phrase "sudden and accidental" contained in the pollution exclusion was patently unambiguous and that therefore, extrinsic evidence would not be considered to establish a latent ambiguity. |
 | | The court in Madison determined that the language of a similar pollution exclusion clause at issue in that case was unambiguous, and therefore, extrinsic evidence related to the historical context in which that clause was approved through the insurance regulatory process, should not be considered when interpreting its meaning. |
| www.hklaw.com /Publications/Newsletters.asp?IssueID=140&Article=674 (1188 words) |