A Louisiana Court of Appeal held that a contractor’s insurer’s defense obligation does not extend to defending a general contractor as an additional insured after a judgment dismissing its insured from the litigation. Maldanado v. Kiewit Louisiana Co., 2014 WL 1202744 (La.App. 1 Cir. Mar. 24, 2014). See also, Maldonado v. Kiewit Louisiana Co., 2014 WL 1203180 (La.App. 1 Cir. Mar. 24, 2014).
An insured was sued by the survivors of former employees who were killed while working on a bridge construction project. The insured was dismissed, with prejudice, and the insurer discontinued defending the general contractor as an additional insured The trial court held that the contractor’s insurer continued to have a duty to defend the general contractor. The Court of Appeal held that the policy’s additional insured endorsement provided that the policy “applies when liability is sought to be imposed upon the additional insured … because of something the named insured … is alleged to have done or failed to do” and that once the named insured, the subcontractor could no longer be held liable, the general contractor could no longer be held liable for fault of the subcontractor.