In The Boeing Co. v. Cont’l Cas. Co., 2007 WL 4357464 (Cal. Ct. App., Dec. 14, 2007), the California Court of Appeal found that an additional insured endorsement was not ambiguous.  The endorsement provided coverage to others acting in their capacity as agents of the insured so long as the insured requested as much.   A request from the party seeking coverage did not comply with the endorsement because such a request had to come from the named insured.

This case confirms that it will not read ambiguity into a policy where none exists.  An additional insured endorsement allowing “the insured” to submit requests for additional insured coverage entitles only the named insured, not the others, to submit such requests.

Attachments:

Boeing v. Continental

[ ]

29 Kb