No ambiguity in boiler policy about meaning of "explosion" and types of objects excepted from exclusion; all-risk insurer must provide coverage ... article from: Journal of Risk and Insurance

This digital document is an article from Journal of Risk and Insurance, published by American Risk and Insurance Association, Inc. on June 1, 1999. The length of the article is 1530 words. The page length shown above is based on a typical 300-word page. The article is delivered in HTML format and is available in your Amazon.com Digital Locker immediately after purchase. You can view it with any web browser.

From the supplier: The explosion of a pulp digester machine inside Stone Container Corp resulted in a battle between the firm's two insurers with regard to respective coverage responsibilities. Stone Container's insurers were Hartford Steam Boiler Inspection and Insurance Co. for boiler and machinery insurance policy and Lloyd's for its all-risks policy. The initial ruling of the trial court declaring that the boiler insurer must provide coverage was reversed by the Court of Appeals. The Court ruled that the pulp digester did not fall under the insurer's boiler and machinery policy.

Citation Details
Title: No ambiguity in boiler policy about meaning of "explosion" and types of objects excepted from exclusion; all-risk insurer must provide coverage arising out of wood pulp manufacturing disaster.(Stone Container Corp. v. Hartford Steam Boiler Inspection and Insurance Co.)
Author: Jeffrey W. Stempel
Publication:Journal of Risk and Insurance (Refereed)
Date: June 1, 1999
Publisher: American Risk and Insurance Association, Inc.
Volume: 66 Issue: 2 Page: 295(3)

Distributed by Thomson Gale