Michael F. Schmidt Obtains Affirmation From Michigan Court Of Appeals Of Summary Disposition In Insurance Coverage Case

Kent Companies, Inc. v Wausau Insurance Companies, Michigan Court of Appeals docket number 292237 (2011). The plaintiff, Kent Companies, Inc., filed suit against Wausau Insurance Companies seeking coverage for damages charged to Kent by the general contractor, Rockford Pepper Construction Company, arising out of the construction of the J. W. Marriott Hotel in downtown Grand Rapids. The claim pertained to the installation of the east entrance to the hotel which included a driveway with brick pavers and snowmelt tubes installed. We obtained a summary disposition and the Court of Appeals affirmed that there was no coverage available for any of the claims. We argued that the claim for coverage for removal and replacement of the insured’s concrete and wire mesh was not covered because there was no ‘occurrence’ and no ‘property damage’. We argued that the claim for removal and replacement of the brick pavers was not covered because of the impaired property exclusion, since the pavers were not damaged and the only expenses were incurred in their removal and replacement. Finally, we argued that there was no coverage for the claim for the removal and replacement of the snowmelt tubes, because the insured was not charged anything for the snowmelt tubes. The Court of Appeals further rejected the insured’s argument that there was an issue of fact as to how the snowmelt tubes were damaged, because the only question was whether they were damaged through the insured’s work which was undisputed.