The opinion of the court was delivered by: Denise Cote, District Judge
This Opinion concludes that a seven-month delay in providing notice of a claim to an insurer is unreasonable and relieves the insurer of any obligation to provide coverage in this complex construction litigation. This litigation relates to alleged problems in the design and construction of a building for the use of Baruch College (the "Project"). On August 1, 2007, plaintiff Travelers Casualty and Surety Company ("Travelers"), acting as administrator for Reliance Insurance Company ("Reliance") and asserting claims assigned to Travelers by Trataros Construction, Inc. ("Trataros"), commenced this action against defendant Dormitory Authority - State of New York ("DASNY") and others. Trataros performed work on the Project for DASNY, the owner of the Project.
On November 13, 2008, after waves of pleadings, Trataros and Travelers filed a fourth-party complaint against a subcontractor, two material suppliers, and twelve insurance companies. One of the insurance companies, United States Fire Insurance Company ("U.S. Fire"), filed the motion addressed through this Opinion.*fn1 For the following reasons, U.S. Fire's motion to dismiss*fn2 is converted to a motion for summary judgment and granted.
Much of the relevant background is provided in this Court's Opinion of April 25, 2008, familiarity with which will be assumed. Travelers Cas. & Sur. Co., 2008 WL 1882714, at *1-2. The parties to this action were each involved, directly or indirectly, with the design or construction of the Project, a 785,000 square-foot structure located between 24th and 25th Streets and Lexington and Third Avenues in Manhattan. DASNY, who acted as the "owner" of the Project on behalf of City University of New York and Baruch College, entered into more than a dozen co-prime contracts for the Project's construction work, two of which were awarded to Trataros.*fn3
In connection with the work to be performed by Trataros under these contracts, U.S. Fire issued a comprehensive general liability policy to Trataros for the period April 1, 1998 to April 1, 1999, which was subsequently renewed and extended to April 1, 2000 (the "U.S. Fire CGL Policy").*fn4 Under the U.S. Fire CGL Policy, coverage is provided for, inter alia, claims based upon "property damage" arising out of an "occurrence." "Property damage" is defined by the policy as "[p]hysical injury to tangible property, including all resulting loss of use of that property" and "[l]oss of use of tangible property that is not physically injured"; an "occurrence" is defined as "an accident, including continuous or repeated exposure to substantially the same general harmful conditions."
The U.S. Fire CGL Policy also contains two notice provisions. One is a condition requiring that, in the event of an "occurrence," Trataros, as the insured, "must see to it that we [U.S. Fire] are notified as soon as practicable." In the event of a "claim or 'suit'" (where "suit" is defined as a "civil proceeding in which damages because of . . . 'property damage' . . . to which this insurance applies are alleged"), Trataros is similarly required to "see to it that we receive written notice of the claim or 'suit' as soon as practicable." It is this second notice provision on which resolution of U.S. Fire's motion to dismiss depends.
The work called for under the contracts awarded to Trataros included the installation of an epoxy terrazzo flooring system that, according to the third-party compliant filed by DASNY and its construction manager against Trataros, was to cover "thousands of square feet of public space in the Project." The third-party complaint alleges that
[t]he epoxy terrazzo that Trataros and [G.M. Crocetti Inc.] installed in the Project is deteriorating and is otherwise defective. Among other things, the epoxy terrazzo is cracking and crumbling at the perimeter of the poured area at the zinc divider strips over substantial areas of the epoxy terrazzo installation. The epoxy terrazzo is also delaminating and "blistering" in increasingly larger areas.
The third-party complaint also alleges more generally that "[t]he work performed by Trataros and its subcontractors failed to satisfy the technical and quality requirements" contained in the contracts between DASNY and Trataros as well as "accepted industry practices," and that, as a result, "significant portions of Trataros'[s] work was defective, substandard, or otherwise unacceptable" and thus "had to be repaired or replaced."
The fourth-party complaint filed by Trataros and Travelers seeks, inter alia, a declaratory judgment that coverage exists under the U.S. Fire CGL Policy for the claims asserted by DASNY and its construction manager, as well as "complete indemnification and/or compensatory damages, to the full extent of such coverage," in the event that DASNY prevails on those claims. U.S. Fire has now moved to dismiss Trataros and Travelers's fourth-party claims under Rule 12(b)(6), Fed. R. Civ. P.
I. Conversion to Motion for Summary Judgment
U.S. Fire asserts, in sum, that the fourth-party complaint's claims against it must be dismissed because (1) U.S. Fire was not given timely notice of the claims that form the basis for the instant action, in violation of the terms of the U.S. Fire CGL Policy, and (2) the allegations of the third- and fourth-party complaints demonstrate that no coverage exists under the U.S. Fire CGL Policy in any ...