Insurer Must Defend After Court Deems Coverage Not In Excess To Other Carrier

A former employee of TriPacific Capital Advisors had decided to sue the company and the company president, Geoffrey Fearns, for a variety of employment-related causes, including his termination and compensation.

He was seeking compensatory damages no less than $8.9 million.

At the time, TriPacific held a directors & officers policy through Federal Insurance Company, a Chubb company, and an employment practices liability policy through Travelers Insurance Company.

When the underlying suit landed on TriPacific’s desk, Fearns and the company at large tendered notice to both insurance companies of the impending litigation.

Both policies contained duty to defend provisions. Upon receipt of notice, Travelers agreed to defend TriPacific in the underlying suit while Federal denied its duty to defend. In its argument to deny coverage, Federal said that its policy’s ‘other insurance’ provision rendered its policy ‘excess’ to Travelers.