Moroney Body Works, Inc. v. Central Insurance Companies (Lawyers Weekly No. 11-093-15)

NOTICE:  All slip opinions and orders are subject to formal revision and are superseded by the advance sheets and bound volumes of the Official Reports.  If you find a typographical error or other formal error, please notify the Reporter of Decisions, Supreme Judicial Court, John Adams Courthouse, 1 Pemberton Square, Suite 2500, Boston, MA, 02108-1750; (617) 557-1030; SJCReporter@sjc.state.ma.us   14-P-422                                        Appeals Court   MORONEY BODY WORKS, INC.  vs.  CENTRAL INSURANCE COMPANIES. No. 14-P-422. Worcester.     January 12, 2015. – August 6, 2015.   Present:  Fecteau, Wolohojian, & Massing, JJ.     Insurance, Fire, Property damage, Construction of policy, Coverage, Amount of recovery for loss.  Contract, Insurance.  Damages, Breach of contract, Repairs.  Practice, Civil, Damages.       Civil action commenced in the Superior Court Department on February 13, 2012.   The case was heard by Richard T. Tucker, J., on motions for summary judgment.     William A. Schneider for the defendant. David K. McCay for the plaintiff.        WOLOHOJIAN, J.  We consider whether a commercial property insurance policy issued by Central Insurance Companies (Central) provides coverage and, if so, to what extent, for damage to a bookmobile caused by a fire at its insured, Moroney Body Works, Inc. (Moroney).  Central relies principally on two provisions of its policy to support its denial of coverage.  First, it contends that the “other insurance” provision means that Central’s coverage does not come into play until the policy limit of a Massachusetts garage insurance policy issued to Moroney by Pilgrim Insurance Company (Pilgrim) is exhausted.[1]  Second, Central argues, in the alternative, that its liability is limited to the cost of repairing the bookmobile.  We conclude that because the two policies insured the same interest in the same property against the same risk, Central’s “other insurance” provision applies.  We also conclude that the “loss payment” provision of Central’s policy limits its liability, at its election, to the cost of repair.  We accordingly reverse the summary judgment in favor of Moroney on its breach of contract claim. 1.  Background.  The facts are undisputed.  Moroney manufactures specialized truck bodies in Worcester.  On April 7, 2011, a fire began in one vehicle at Moroney’s facility and spread to a custom-built bookmobile that had just been completed for the city of Beverly (city).  The city refused to accept delivery of the bookmobile after the fire. Moroney had two insurance policies at the time of the fire: a commercial property policy issued by Central, and a garage insurance policy issued by Pilgrim.  Moroney demanded payment under both.  Central denied liability.  Pilgrim’s policy provided primary coverage, and Pilgrim agreed that its policy covered the cost of repairing the bookmobile.  It paid $ 12,449.82 based on its appraiser’s estimate of […]

Read more...