Summary
holding that absolute pollution exclusion bars insurance coverage for "sick building syndrome" claim alleging injury caused by release or dispersal of contaminants from attic space of building into the indoor air supply
Summary of this case from Richardson v. Nationwide Mut. Ins. Co.Opinion
No. 96-2794
Decided April 17, 1998
Steven Chase, Ronala L. Collier, Abel, Band, Russell, Collier, Pitchford Gordon, Sarasota, FL, for Defendant-Appellant.
W. Lane Neilson, Wayne Tosko, Neilson Associates, Orlando, FL, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida.
D.C. Docket No. 94-1646-CIV-T-24C.
This is an appeal from the district court's order granting the plaintiff's motion for summary judgment in an insurance declaratory judgment action. The district court's order, published at 925 F. Supp. 758 (M.D. Fla. 1996), contains a concise presentation of the facts and an excellent discussion of the law, but noted that Florida law was not settled on the interpretation of an absolute pollution exclusion. Since the district court's opinion was issued, the Florida Supreme Court decided Deni Associates of Florida, Inc. v. State Farm Fire Cas. Ins. Co., and ruled that two pollution exclusion clauses nearly identical to the pollution exclusion clause in this case presented no ambiguities. Based on that opinion, we hold that the pollution exclusion clause at issue here is not ambiguous, and AFFIRM the district court's grant of summary judgment to the plaintiff.
Deni Associates of Florida, Inc. v. State Farm Fire Cas. Ins. Co., ___ So.2d ___ (1998).
Id. at ___.