THE PORT OF PORT ANGELES v. CERTAIN UNDERWRITERS AT LLOYD'S LONDON Et Al Complaint

Case 3:15-cv-05180-KLS Document 1-2 Filed 03/26/15 Page 1 of 33
EXHIBIT 1
F I LE D
CLA-LLAM COUNTY
IIEGEWED
jAN 12 Z015
FEB 2 7 2015
1NSURANCE
CpMM1SStONER
BARBARA CHF36ST'ENSEN CLER4C
a
S
G
IN TI-iE SUPERIOR COURT OF TI;IE STATE OF WASHINGTON
7
IN AND FOR THE COUNTY Or CLALLAM
8
9
10
'1'HE PORT OF POR7' ANGrLES,

a Washington municipal corporation,
I1
Plaintiff,
12
V.
13
14
F;
E'
CERTAIN UNDERWRITERS AT LLOYD'S,

LONDON AND CERTA.IN LONDON
15
MARICET' COMPANIES, BRI'I'ISH LAW
INSURANCE COMPANY, LTD.,
16
COMMERCIAL IJNION ASSURANCE
COMPANY P,L.C., CONTINENTAL
17' ASSURANC,k: OF I.,ONDON, LTD.,
EDINBURGI-i ASSURANCE COMPANY,
18
L.TD., EDINBURGI-i ASSURANCE
COMPANY, LTD. NO, 2, EDINBURGH
19
ASSURANCE COMPANY, L'1'I). N0. 3,
EXCESS INSURANCE COMPANY, L'1'D.,
20 INDEMNITY MARINE INSURANCL
COMPANY, LTD. "T"A/C, INSURANCE
21
COMPANY OF NORTH AMERICA, LA
RCUNION FRANCAISE S.A.
22 D'ASSURANCES ET DES
ItEASSURANCES, LA REUNION
23
FRA.NCAISE S.A. D'ASSURANCES ET
DES REASSUR-ANCES "PL" A/C,
24
PORT OF PORrI' ANGELES'

COMPLAIN`i' FOR DAMAGES AND
DECLARATORY JUDGMEN'1'
25
TE-IE;NADi.f:[t LAW GROUPi>i,i,c

PACIfIC EiUIL.11ING
POR'.C'S COMPLAINT - I
720 Third Avcuuc, Suitc 1400

SLA"I`CLL:, WASHING'I'ON 48104
206621-1433
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
LII3ER'I'Y MUTUAL INSURANCE

COMPANY, NORTHERN ASSURANCE
COMPANY LTD., NORTI-IERN MARITIML
INSURANCE COMPA.NY, LTD., OCLAN
MARINL' INSURANCE COMPANY, LTD.,
0C1;AN MARINE INSURANCE
COMPANY, LTD. T A/C, ONEBEACON
INSURANCE COMPANY, PHOENIX
ASSURANCI: PUI3I.IC COMPANY LTD.,
PROVINCIAI., INSURANCE COMPANY,
LTD., 'I'HRI:ADNErDLE INSURANCE
COMPANY, THE TRAVELERS
INDEMNITY COMPANY
8
The Port of Port Angeles (the "Port"), by and tlirougli its attorneys, by way of
9
10
complaint alleges as follows:
INTRODUCTION
ll
1.
12
13
This is an action for (a) contract damages based on the defense and
indeninifieation provisions of the liability insurance policies sold by the defendants and/or
14, their predecessors in interest to the Port, sucll damages consisting of property damage
15
including environ>nental response costs irleurred by the Port in respond'zng to alleged
16
enviroiimental contamination at the MTA Sitc, K Ply Site, and West Hatbor Site
17
(collectively "sites") and other related activities; (b) a declaratory judgment adjudicating
18
the iespective rights, duties, and obligations of the parties under the liability insuranee
19
policies sold by the defendants or their predecessors to tlte Port; and (c) costs and
20
attorneys` fces incurred by
21
of law.
24
Port in bringing this action pursuant to additional provisions
TIIE PARTIES
22
23
tlYe
2.
The Port is a Washington municipal corporation in good standing with its
principal placc of busincss in 1'ort Angeles, Washington. The Port is the owner of
25 i
T'1-!C NADLL'R LAW GROUP ri-i,c

PACII7IC LiIJIL.UING
920 Ttkird Avenue, Suite 1400
STsATTLIi, WASI-IINGTON 98104
POR'I''S CQZvIPLAINT - 2
206-621-1433
substantial rcal property including property fronting on the Port AtigeIcs Harbor in
Clallam Cotlnty, Waslaington,
3.
Thc defcndants ai-e insuiance carriers, whicll at all times relevant to this
action were engagcd in the business of selling primaly, umbrella an.d/or excess liability
insurance polices.
4.
In consideration of substantial premiums paid by the Port, the defendants or
their predecessors issued prinlaly, umbrella and/or excess liability insurance policies to
the Port. Ccrtain Underwriters at Lloyd's, Lonclon and Ccrtain London Market Insurers
("LMI") issued primaly, umbrella and/or excess liability policies to the Port from 1966
10
througla 1988. General Accident Fire & Life Assurance issued primary, umbrella and/or
11
excess liability policies to the Port from May 16, 1961 to 1969. Travelers Indemnity
12
Colnpany ("'f'ravelers") issued prinlazy, umbrclla and/or excess liability policies to the
13
Port from 1969 to 1972. General Insurance Company of Anierica issued priinary,
14 . wnbrella and/or exeess liability policies to the Port fiom Januaiy 7, 1979 to 1982.
15
5.
On iliformation aiid belief, Liberty Muttlal Insurarlce Coinpany ("Liberty
16
Mutual") is the successor in interest to General Insui-arlce Company of Anierica. On
17
information and belief, Onel3eacon insurance company ("4nel3eacon") is the successor in
18
interest to General Accident Fire and Life Assurance Corporation.
19
6.
rxhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated by reference, sets forth the
20
nacnes of the defendants presently known to the Port and, to the extent the Port has
21
1<nowledge, their states or countrles of lIlco2poration, and principal places of busincss.
22
Upon iliformation and belief, iione of the defendants are residents of or are dorrlicilcd
23
within the state of Washington, but all have ti-ansacted business within the state. There may
24
be otlier applicable policies which have been isstued by the defendants or their
25
'i'1IG NAllLER LAW GI2UUP ri,t,c

PACI[=1C BUILDING
PORT'S COMPLAINT - 3
720 Third Avcnuc, Suite 1400

SHATTLG, WASI-IINo'rON 98104
206-621-1433
predecessors to the Port fiom time to time, which are presently unlcnown to fihe 1'ort,
2
Exhibit A may be amended as additional applicable policies are discovered and as the
currently known states or countries of incorporation and the principal places of business
are determined.
,IURISDICTION AND VENUE
5
6
7.
'1 his Court lias suhject matter jurisdiction over this declaratoiy judgment
action under RC W 7.24.010, et seq. because a real and ,justiciable controversy exists.
FuIther, this Court has.personal jurisdiction because the defendants or their predecessors
each sold insurance to the Port in Washington.
10
8.
Venue is proper in this Court pursuant to RCW 48.05.220 because a
11
substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claims brought in this action
12
occurrcd in Clailam County, which is also the situs of the dainaged property that has giveli
13
rise to tlie liability alleged herein.

T)EIE POLICIES
14!
15,
9.
From at least 1966, defcndants or their predccessors sold to the Port celtain
16
prinlary, umbrella and/or excess liability insurance policies, including those policies set
17.
forth in I;xhibit T3, and possibly otliers ("Policies). I;xhibit B, attached hereto and
18
incorporated herein by rcference, sets fortll the applicable policy nuxnbers and periods of
19
coverage foi- each defendant.
20
21
10.
with all applicable conditions of cacli of the Policies.
THE ENVII20NMENTAL LIABILITIES
22
23
24
'I'he Port paid all premiums due and owing under the Policies and complied
11.
Certain environmental liabilities have been asserted against the Port (the
"Environmental Liabilities") by the federal and/or statc governments and\or other parties
25
TI-il:?NnDL1;R LAW GROUI'hl1c
t'AC:II'ic 13U11.,DING
720 "fhircl Avenite, Suite 1400
SI=A7'11.13, WASI-IING"1'ON 98104
206-621-1433
(collectively, the "Environtnental Claimants"). These parties assert that the Port is liable
for the invcstigation and remediation of property damage resulting froin environmental
contamination at the sites referred to by the Port as Marine Trades Area Site ("MTA
Site"), tlie K Ply Site, and the Western Harbor Sedimcnts Site, located in Port Angelcs,
Washington.
12.
Thc Environmental Claimants allege property damage caused by among
othel tliings, chemicals, minerals, waste, by-products and/or other substances (eollectively
"I-Iazardous Substances") allegedly produced, generated, deposited or disposed on property
owned or operated by the Port. The Environmental Claimants allege that the I-Iazardous
10
Substances have damaged or threatcn to damage the groundwater, sediments, surface
11'
waters, and/or natural resources, and that the actual or potential contaminatioti resulting
12
fiona the prescnce of and migration of Hazardous Substances at or near thc sites may
13'
plesent an ilnlninent and substantial danger to the public health or welfare.
14
13.
The Cnvironmental Claimants souglit and still seek to require the Port to
15
investigate, monitor, survey, test and gather information to identify and evaluate the
16
existence of property damage including daniage to the environment and danger to the
17
public hcaltli or welfare, and to remediate eiivironinental contaniination and property
18
damage whicli was uncovered.
19
14,
'I'lie I;nvironmental Liabilities and the sums expended to date by the Port in
20
contlectlon Wlth the Erivlronmental Liabilities fall within the coverage of the Policies
21
wliich the defendants or their predcccssors sold to the Port.
22
15.
The dcfendants brcached obligations that they undertook in the Policies by
23
failing to comply with Washington regulations regarding such matters, and by failing to
24
fillfill their duties to timely investigate the Port's claims, determine coverage and
25
TE-IL'NADLE,R LAW C;RCIUPrt.i.c

PACIPIC t3UtLDiNG
720 Tliird Avenuc, suitc 1400

sLn'1`I'LC, WAs1lING'rON 98104
206-621-1433
indemnify t.he Port for ccllain expenses it lias incurred as a result of the Environmental
2 II Liabilities.
DrFENDANTS' LIABILITY FOR EXPENSES OF SUIT
3
4
16.
In aecordancc with the poliey terms and conditions, the Port notified the
defendants and/or their predecessors of claims with respect to certain insurance policics.
17.
In responsc to the Port's claim for its environtnental liabilities at the MTA
site, 'Travelers denied coverage. The MTA site was later divided into two sites, the MTA
site and the K Ply site. Travelers has not Lnade a coverage determination with respect to
the K Ply site. The retnaining defendants accepted the Port's tender of the defense of its
10
environmental liabilities at the MTA site and the K Ply site under reservations of rights,
11
incli+ding thc rights to deny coverage and to seel< reimbursement of payments made to or
12
on the POrt's behalf. Despite being provided notice of the Port's claims more thaii twenty
13
years ago, these defendants have failed to make coverage deternlinations regarding their
14
indemnity obligations with respect to the MTA and K Ply sites. In response to the Port's
15
elairn fol its environmental liabilities at the Wcstern Harbor site, all of the defendants
16
accepted the Port's tender of defense under reservations of rights, including the riglits to
17
dcny coverage and to seek reinibursement of payments made to or on tiie Port's behalf
18
llespite being provided notice of the Port's claims inore t11an three years ago, all of the
19
defendants have failed to nlake coverage determinations regarding their indemnity
20
obligations with respect to the Western 1-larbor site. All of the defendants have breached
21
their enhanced duty of good faith to their insured by failing to promptly conduct an
22
adequate and reasonable investigatioli, by failing to niake a coverage determination, and by
23
giving greater consideration to their own interests than those of their insured
24
18.
The Port was foreed to bring this lawsuit to obtairl the benefits o its
25
POR"I''S COMPLAINT - 6
Tl IE NADL,GR LAW GROUPri,i.c

PACIFIC IIUILDINC3
720 9'Itird Avenue, Suile 1400
SL:nT'i1.E, WASH1NG'rON 98104
206-6211433
insurance policies issued by the dcfendants because the defendants breached their
obligations to investigate, defend, and/or inderruiify the Port pursuant to the terms of the
Policies.
FIRST CLAIM FOR RELIrF
(Damages)
6
7
8
19.
'1"he Port incol-porates the allegations of paragraplls 1 tluough 18, as if fully
set folrth herein.

20.
The Port was required to expend, and continues to bc required to expend
substantial sums to respond to the Environmental Liabilities. "I'he Port's response costs
10
include, but are not limited to, the cost to investigate and respond to the )nvironmental
11
Liabilities.
12
21.
The defendants assumed duties pursuant to the Policies to deferid the Port
13
and to indemnify it fol- certain costs and liability incurred by reason of the Environmental
14
Liabilities. By denying coverage, by failing to pay all of the Port's response costs, and/or
15
by failing to make a coverage determination, the defendants llave breached these dtlties. ,
16
SFCOND CLAZM FOR RELIFF
17
(Declaratory ReIieQ
18
19
20
22.
The Port incorporates the allegations of paragraphs I lhroug1121, as if fillly
set forth herein.

23.
The Port assei- ts that the defendants have obligations to defend and
21
indemnify the Port and to pay in full the costs which are being incurred and wliieh will
22
eontinue to bc incurred by the Port in connection with the Environmental Liabilities. By
23
its coverage denial witli respect to the M1'A site, and by its failure to malce a coverage
24
determinatiolt with respect to thc K Ply and Western Harbor site, Travelers denies that it is
25 '
- PHE NAI)1.ER L,AW GROUPi>u.c

i'ACII'IC [3UIi.DING
720'1'hird Avenue, Suile 1400
SI.iATTLE, VdASHING'rolJ 98104
206-621-1433
1 I bound by the obligations asserted by the Port. By their failure to make a covelage
2
determination, the remaining dcfendants also deny that they are bound by the obligations
asserted by the Port with respect to all the sites.
24.
Accordingly, an actual and justiciable controversy presently exists between
the Port and the defendants as to the defendants' obligations to defend and to pay the costs
arising out of the Environmental Liabilities.
TIIIRD CLAIM FOR RELIEF
(Attoriiey Fees)
9
10
11
25.
The Port incorporates thc allegations of paragraphs I through 24, as if fully
set forth herein.

26.
As a consequence of the Port having to bring suit to obtain the benefits of its
12
insurance coverage under the Policies, the defendants are liable to thc Port for its
13
reasoiiable attorney fees and costs in bringing this suit.
REOUEST FOR RELIEF
14
15
Whereforc, the Port of Port Angeles requests relief as follows:
16
l.
h'or judgnient in favor of the Port and against the defendants, jointly and
17
severally, awarding damages in an alnount sufficient to conlpensate the Port for alI costs,
18
fees, and expecises incurred in responding to and defending the Environmental Liabilities
19
tliroiugli the date of tlial in this action.
20
2.
For a deciaratoiy judgment confirming the defendants' joint and several
21
obligafiion to defeiid and indemnify the Port against all filture claims, costs, daniages, and
22
adverse judgments and awards arising fiom the Lnvironmental Liabilities.
23
24
3.
For a judgment in favor of the Port and against the defendants, jointly and
severally, for attorneys' fees, expenses and costs incurred in this action; for prejudgment
25
TI-16 NAULI:R LAW GROtJPt11.LC

PACIFIC RUfLI)ING
720'1'hird Avcnue, Suito 1400
SGIATTLE, WASf I ING'rON 98104
206-621-1433
and post judgment interest on all sulns awarded the Port; and for such other and further
relief as may be allowed by any provision of law or that this Court deems just and proper.
3
4
DATED this
t'
day of January, 2015.
'I'I-IE NAllLL;R LAW GROLJP PL.I_.0
5
6
7
IV,jark N. Nacller, W NliA No. 1zs 126

Liberty Waters, WSIIn No. 37034
John S. Dolese, WSBA No. 18015, of Counsel
Attorneys for Plaintiff, Port of Port Angeles
8
9
10
12
13 I
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
'rt-iENADL,ER LAW GROUPni.r.

I'ACII'IC QUIL.DING
720'I'hird Avenue, Suite 1400
SI:AT'1'LC, WASIIINGTON 98104
206-621-1433
EXHIBIT A
Place of .
Iixcorporation
Prirtcipal Place of
Business
Commercial Union Assurance Company

P.L.C.
England
London, England
Continental Assurance of London, Ltd.
England
London, England
England
London, England
Erance
Paris, France
I3oston,
Massachusetts
Dover, New
I-iampshire
1-Iarrisburg,
Pennsylvania
Canton,
Massachusetts
Defendant
13ritisli Law Insurancc Company, Ltd.

Certain Underwriters at Lloyd's, London
r;dinburgh Assurance Company, Ltd.

rdinburgh Assurance Coinpany, Ltd. No. 2
I?d1nbLlrgh Assurancc Company, Ltd. No. 3
Excess Insurance Cornpany, Ltd.
Indemnity Marine Insurance Company, Ltd.
"T"A/C
lnsuranee Company of Nortll America
La Reunion Francaise S.A. d'Assurances et
des Reassurances
La Reunion Francaise S.A. d'Assurances et
des Reassurances "PL" A/C
Liberty Mutual Insurance Company
Northern Assurance Cotnpany Ltd.
Northern Maritime Insurance Coinpany, Ltd.
Occan Marine Insurance Company, Ltd.
Ocean Marine Insurance Coinpany, Ltd. T
A/C
OneBcacon Insurance Conipany
I.N
Place of
Principal Place of
Incorporation Basiness
Defendant
Plioenix Assurance Public Coinpany Ltd.

Provincial Insurancc Company, Ltd.
7'llreadneedle Insurance Company
ITartford,
Connecticut
'1'he Travelers Indennnity Company
11-2
Hartford,
Connecticut
EXI-IIBIT B
Port of Port Angeles Primlr,y Covera,;e
Policy/ Certificate No.
Effective Dates
Insirrer
CG 366433
5/16/1961-5/16/1962
General Accident I'ire and

Life Assurance Company
CG 366712
5/16/1 962-5/16/1963
Gencral Accident Pire and

CG 384259
5/16/1963-5/16/1964
General Accident Fire and

CG 370877
5/16/1964-5/16/1965
General Accident Fire and

CG 451052
5/1 6/1965-5/16/1966
General Accident i'ire and

Life Assuranee Company
CG 450793
5/16/1966-5/16/1967
General Accident rire and

Life Assurance Conipany
GLA 36-728-14
5/16/1967-5/16/1968
General Aecident Pire and

Life Assuranee Company
GLA 37-758-04
5/1 6/1968-5/16/1969
General Accident rire and

Life Assuranee Coinpany
650-2689023-IND
11/1/1972-11/1/1973
The Travelers Indeintlity

Company
650-188A227-9-IND
1 l/1/1973-1 i/1/1974
The Travelers Indemnity

Coinpany
650-188A227-9-IND-74
11/1/1974-11/1/1975
The Travelers Indemnity

Company
650-188A227-9-IND-78
11/1/1978-11/1/1979
The Travelers Indeinnity

Company
Cl' 922901
I/1/1979-1/1/1982
General Insurance
Company of Ainerica
MC 5984
1/1/1982-t/1/1984
Certain Underwriters at
Lloyd's, London
MC 6023
1/1/1984-1/1/1988
Certain Underwriters at
Lloyd's, London
Poxt of Port Aiiiieles Excess Coveragc

Policy/ Cei-tificate No.
Effective Dates
Insuier
ST 13938
12/31/1966-12/31/1969
Certain Undex-writers at Lloyd's,

London and Certain London
Market Companies
ST 13937
12/31/1966-12/31/1969
Certain Underwriters at Lloyd's,

Market Companies
S"I' 13934
11/18/1966-12/31/1966

Market Companies
CtIP-189A750-A
I l./1/1973-11/1 /1 974
'I'he Travelers Indezn.nity

Company
CUP-189A750-8-74
11/1/1974-11/1/1975
The Travelers Indernnity

Cornpany
JSL 1025
12/31/1977-12/31/1979

Maricet Companies
JSL1070
12/31/1979-12/31/1980

London and Certain I,ondon
Market Companics
JS1_. 1091
12/31/1980-12/31/1983
Ccrtain Underwriters at Lloyd's,

I,ondon and Certain London
Market Companies
JSL 1142
12/31/1983-12/31/1986

London and Certain L.ondon
Market Coanpanies
13-2
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
SUPERIOR COURT OF WASHINGTON FOR CLALLAM COUNTY

THE PORT OF PORT ANGELES,
i 9
Plaintiff,
10
1"11
NO.
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
CERTAIN UNDERWRITERS AT
LLOYD'S, LONDON AND CERTAIN
LONDON MARKET COMPANIES,
BRITISH LAW INSURANCE
COMPANY, LTD., COMMERCIAL
UNION ASSURANCE COMPANY
P.L.C., CONTINENTAL ASSURANCE
OF LONDON, LTD., EDINBURGH
ASSURANCE COMPANY, LTD.,
EDINBURGH ASSURANCE
COMPANY, LTD. NO. 2, EDINBURGH
ASSURANCE COMPANY, LTD. NO.
3, EXCESS INSURANCE COMPANY,
LTD., INDEMNITY MARINE
INSURANCE COMPANY, LTD. "T"
A/C, INSURANCE COMPANY OF
NORTH AMERICA, LA REUNION
FRANCAISE S.A. D'ASSURANCES
ET DES REASSURANCES, LA
REUNION FRANCAISE S.A.
D'ASSURANCES ET DES
REASSURANCES "PL" A/C, LIBERTY
MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY,
DECLARATION REGARDING EMAIL TRANSMISSION
Re: PORT OF PORT ANGELES' COMPLAINT FOR
DAMAGES AND DECLARATORY JUDGMENT
DECLARATION REGARDING
E-MAIL TRANSMISSION
GR 17(a)(2)
PLATT IRWIN LAW FIRM
403 South Peabody St.

Port Angeles, WA 98362
(360) 457-3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
NORTHERN ASSURANCE
COMPANY LTD., NORTHERN
MARITIME INSURANCE COMPANY,
LTD., OCEAN MARINE INSURANCE
COMPANY, LTD., OCEAN MARINE
INSURANCE COMPANY, LTD. T A/C,
ONEBEACONINSURANCE
COMPANY, PHOENIX ASSURANCE
PUBLIC COMPANY LTD.,
PROVINCIAL INSURANCE
COMPANY, LTD., THREADNEEDLE
INSURANCE COMPANY, THE
TRAVELERS INDEMNITY
COMPANY
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
The undersigned SIMON BARNHART declares and states as follows:

On the 12`h day of January, 2015, I received the PORT OF PORT
1.
ANGELES' COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND DECLARATORY JUDGMENT,
via email transmission, signed by Mark S. Nadler.
I have examined the document to which this Declaration is attached, and it
2.
consists of 15 pages including this Declaration.
3.
It is complete and legible.
I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Washington that
the foregoing is true and correct.
DATED this 12th day of January, 2015, at Port Angeles, Washington.
20
21 j
SIMON BARNHART
22
23
24
25
26
27
DECLARATION REGARDING EMAIL TRANSMISSION

Re: PORT OF PORT ANGELES' COMPLAINT FOR
DAMAGES AND DECLARATORY JUDGMENT
PLATT IRWIN LAW FIRM '

403 South Peabody St.
Port Angeles, WA 98362
(360) 457-3327
r t
'"
~ -i - .. i
'
~4~' 3TATg~ -
Case 3:15-cv-05180-KLS
Document 1-2 Filed 03/26/15 Page 17 of 33
.!
. . -
. .
_ '.'.
"-,. '
. -'
.'
:, 1
.-^~..
'
'" ,ti0` ~
~ QFFIC~
0F THE INSURANCE
,
x COMMISSIOXER ' :
~-
~"
~. . -
. '
' ~ F _
.:l
..}'. .7~
'
,J '
,}
' ..
. .
: i
' t. .
. .
a~
.f
._ _
`_
.- `
J.
,
-
.
,.,
'
.
,
. '
..
~ - .
,,~'
_
t\
'~
.
y
: }.
.
.
`l. ~
'-
"
_
'
_
_
__
"
:i -.
'
`_
_-
s:
. -
. . . _
..
^-r ', i
"`~.
-3 T
'
'
,'t.
-t
_
. .
._
,
.. . .. .
..
.. '
i- ' .
. ~_
_.
- .
~ _~.,
_
.-t -- ~
'
]..
_.
"
y.
-.~`~
i
"
-
T- -
;~7
.
,
' '
r
-+>r
. .~^
.J
. _
_
_
J
."-.~.
.~~? - _ `r
'
'~.
'~
ti
..
.
-r'
-~
-~ ' -_ " - ,a. ~i`'

'
` .-.. . `T> .. '-~,~~
~_
.
_. -. ~ .
'
,~ .
.
_- .>'
~t.
i ._
..
1 F_
t.a~ ;'`.
...
. ~'
"
. -
-_
_ -.
' -
. -'
.d
. , ~ '~`
~ ~.7
`.
-y
I.
~,`__
, ~~ .
..
.
. . - .
'
'r ~
.F
- r .
.J_~
- ~_ .
_
~~
~~
'
..~_.~
, - }
T^
.
~r ~.
~l. r
_.
t _
'
~
_ '
~,
,
Y. , ..
_
l~
, _,
'
' .\
_ ' '
j~ tT ~LY
:.
.
..
`;r _ . 4'^ .
_
.. .
-
'-
. ___
.t
-
v~\
..
.. ~
-~.
,
.
~
.
`~
t . . , _ _
_
...
'
'-'r_ ..'.~
`
k
~t
,
,
. = '~~_
:<
_
.'Y. -
' ..
,
_. .
.
..
_. -
'
_
~~
'
. ~
..
~ t-
'-i "
. . ,~
. . _
.f_
....'
'
-.'
L:`
-..
^~
i`
~`
~, .
- '
'
.3 ;~i
. ,
_
.,t
_
_, . .
0. 2_~t~ ~ ~~
26 lfg84
tL~~- ~R~~ zC~aa7~ sa~o~ - , ' ;.
. _ _ _ . _
_
~ ' .
- ~yO Q ~~~
'
. .
,1 _
,~
-- .
'
, J 'c ~r
~ ._
'.1.,
. .
_`
~
.
~r:
~
'
_
"^_;
.~`
_ _
_ '
~
.~
,
. .
'
-~~.
:y'
- .
' ~~
. . - '
.
-`
.~_
'~
''
_
~ : a oo~
l f
'
,'. .
. .
_ .
_ . "~i;
. , -
'
.r
.l
..
._..
;
.
_~~-
'
,
~ s;`
,44
~ T
.
5[ '
_..
_ . .-_
.;L
_ ' ..
`t'
. .
. . .
-
;4%. .
. -
r' ~
_ , .~.. .
,~"
a i
s
'a} .~
-_'\'
_,',-r:t" )'
;
'c
c .' ~''
..
}'
_ - ,
1
'
i
_.
~i
'l'
I
~
,
_.
_
.,
:~-l+
~^~
.
_
~' .
_
J
'.
- _
. t.
--
i yQ'
_ _
~-~
~,;
-.-~' . a
, -_
_ ~ <
._
. .
_~
~.
. .
-. _
:
- F+:
. 1.
.F - - -
.. .
_
.
'
..y
s-.
- t
T
~\
'l. ~.li_
"
_
' .
" .
__- ~
-.
' ..~: _ r. 11
--' .
- '
.. .
'
_ .
`,,,-
4-
v_
`t
~~' ~
'1
- .t~M
.~
~- .
' '
t
:
__
..
. ..
- .
`
;J~
~
.
.
__
f . . l
\- .
~i'
~
.
. '
~.~
,:
-.
. ! ' ~ .. ~ [ ~ -
t ;1= :
_ _ ,
+y , ,
- ''
'
S ,
'
_.J
'
:~.
_:
' ' , t
___
... .r
..;
..
. '
, ` T . '~- ~~~~~ '
8410 8153
0000
- -
_~
L,! . .. _
~~J_
-__
i_
"
. ,;t
`
..
,.~'_ : t-.-- f'
~.
.1~
_ _ - ai '; _
. -
--
~-a- ,
, a _.
_
7005 0 3 9 0
-' 1.
.t ' T
i
.-..
_ /~ __
f!' rl
~`
_ '
.. .
~
_-
.'s~
. ..
_~
, .}.'
. ."
~a
. .
.-
_-
~ `,
_ " ~
~_r,;
"
7 ~, -
;.- .-
BOX 40255" ^ .. .
`,
OLYIVIPIA, WA 98504-0255:
-
'~~~
~
--
' ~
S.
- - -~-
-S_A
' - _
?-;
.
. . . .
.-
_
jr
~'~ ,
~
.
.
TRAVELERS INDEMNITY COMPANY THE

CORPORATION SERVICE CO
300 DESCHUTES WAY SW STE 304
TUMWATER WA 98501
_ J ._-
"
'
.
'
_ . -
..
_.
`
.
..
~ `
_ _
.' J
.. '
,,
~.
'~~. ~-
'
'
_-
_
'
_ l
I . .~
'
~_
. .
.~
',
,,-:
;
.
.
_.
-~
"
.tt ~,
".
.
.
.
;
',
Y>
_~
'
~ ~`
'
..._
k
1 . -\.`
_'
` ~,.-~. . .
>
. .
.
.
.
r
-. ,
-, _
``l
' ,l . -?V
t;
. :J- . .-! -
.. .
. i.
~-
'
_r
~'
'
'
~
.
._
`
+
'
. _-.. ' =`.i,
'
- ~
i.t:'
~ `f. t - -' ,
_ ~. - '
~
_,
~ . .
._t.
. ..Y'
.:
'
~- ,
.
'
-
, . .
~ .:'';.
.}
~t
:
%-
. l-
'
'
_
..
-.
- _ ~_~. i
.i+
'7
:` =
~ -~
.r
_ ~ : '
~\..
_ r
` ` - y _~
"
~-
.
,-
, ~
`'
~-.~_'
.
...
--
_
_
. _
__
~ .t'i.4
6
{r `;~
-s'
,
"v-
. :
...
-yer,
S .
.--'
..
'
- r`
- ~}:;
...
'A
. .
'G
\>_
- _ , - -
1' '
' '..8-
_.
'
._ -
. _
, c
` '~ t. .\ _1 -~
.1~ !T - __'4 ,
~_
_
`
- ' ` ~.
~
'
- , ~
~', t
`t - ..
_~
. .
_ __
' ;~
t.
-_
`
'
~,
_~
':s: -
'
;~ ,
,.
~
.- Y `
_
` .
t, +~ ,
.
i
-,7~:~`
_
t
-1 ~ \' ~ 1 ^
~
.
.
.
'
,'\
' . .. _~ +
~
_ t,~ '
- t'~ I. ' -~~
-
-_
"
,~_
i~
y.
`-
.
_ .-~ _ .
- .
.-,
-' T ~
'
.,
'
^'i:-
._
f
.Rr_. ,.
. -
;F : -
~
__
~, _
_ :j ^
---
r
_ ~
. - ~ ,K ~
R-
'" t .
- ( ~:
~
'
,j: ; -
~""
;t . - ~ __ .. .
't,`
~~_'
.
-_
.
. _
~l c ~ .
_. -
' ''
"
~ .-
. ,
~'
~_
i. .'; .
. .. Z
_.
n.
~ ;'' _-~
y.. ~i:
'
--
`+
..'~
-~
- .
-
`,~ _ .,1~ _~_

'
t a.
- . .
_
- '
,._
. ti
,~` ~ -
^-
,.-_
.4- ~ :
.
` .
' '
..
_ ~- ,a
',
-
. .
.
_
.
' -
.
.. _
>.
`_ '
. .
. .- ~ .
.--
~
.
~ . .- . . .
.
^
'
~
-
-.
~ _
?
.
. _ ~
-
,
- .-
PFliEIVED
F8 2 7 2015
INSURANCE
C.OMMfSSIONER
4
5
6
7
8
IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF TIIE STATE OF WASHINGTON

9
IN AND FOR TIIE COUNTY OF CLALLAM

10
11
'1'HE PORT OF PORT ANGELES,

12
Plaintiff,
13
NO. 15-2-00027-9
V.
14
CERTAIN tJNDF..,RWRITERS AT
LLOYD'S, LONDON, ASSICURAZIONI
GENERALI S.P.A., BALOISE
16
INSURANCE COMPANY, LTD., BRITISI
LAW INSURANCE COMPANY, LTD.,
17 BRITISII LAW INSURANCE COMPANY
L'TD. NO. 2 A/C, COMMERCIAL UNION
18
COMMERCIAL UNION ASSURANCE
COMPANY P.L.C., CONTINENTAL
19 ASSURANCI_; OF LONDON, LTD.,
EDINBURGH ASSURANCE COMPANY,
20
LTD., EDINBURGH ASSURANCE
COMPANY, LTD. NO. 2, EDINBtJRGH
21
ASSURANCE COMPANY, LTD, NO. 3,
EXCESS INSURANCE COMPANY, LTD.
22
INDEMNITY MARINE ASSURANCE
COMPANY, I.,TD. "T" A/C, INDEMNITY
23 ' MARINE INSURANCE COMPANY, LTD
"T"A/C, INSURANCE COMPANY OF
24 NORTI-I
15
PORT OF PORT ANGELES' FIRST

AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR
DAMAGES AND DECLARATORY
JUDGMENT
25
Tl-IL' NADLLR LAW GRUUPrt.l.c
Pacific 13uilding
720 Ttiird Avenue, Sttite 1400
Scaltic, Washingto 98104
PORT'S FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT - 1
206-621-1433
Iwitlers(~!)nad I erlaivgrou p, com
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
AMERICA, LA REUNION FRANCAISE

S.A. D'ASSURANCES ET DES
REASSURANCES, LA REUNION
FRANCAISE S.A. D'ASSURANCES ET
DES REASSURANCES "PL" A/C,
LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE
COMPANY, NATIONAL INDEMNITY
COMPANY, NIPPON FIRE AND
MARINE INSURANCE COMPANY
(UK) W. LTD, NORTHERN
ASSURANCE COMPANY LTD.,
NORTHERN ASSURANCE CO. LTD.
NO. 6 A/C, NORTHERN MARITIME
INSURANCE COMPANY, LTD.,
OCEAN MARINE INSURANCE
COMPANY, LTD., OCEAN MARINE
INSURANCE COMPANY, LTD. "T"
A/C, ONEBEACON INSURANCE
COMPANY, PHOENIX ASSURANCE
PLC, PHOENIX ASSURANCE PUBLIC
COMPANY LTD., PROVINCIAL
INSURANCE COMPANY, LTD., RIVER
THAMES INSURANCE CO. LTD.,
SKANDIA U.K. INSURANCE PLC "T"
A/C, SCOTTISH LION INSURANCE
COMPANY, LTD., THREADNEEDLE
INSURANCE COMPANY,
THREADNEEDLEINSURANCE
COMPANY, LTD., THE TRAVELERS
INDEMNITY COMPANY,
WUTTEMBERGISCHE A.W. A/C,
YASUDA FIRE & MARIE INSURANCE
CO. (UK) LTD., YASUDA FIRE &
MARINE INSURANCE COMPANY
(UK) LTD. "T" A/C,
19
Defendants
20
The Port of Port Angeles (the "Port"), by way of complaint alleges as follows:
21
INTRODUCTION
22
23
24
25
1.
This is an environmental insurance coverage action. Plaintiff the Port
a.
A declaration of the rights, duties, and liabilities of the parties under
seeks:
PORT' S FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT = 2
THE NADLER LAW GROUP P[.Lc

Pacific Building
720 Third Avenue, Suite 1400
Seattle, Washington 98104
206-621-1433
lwaters@nadlerlawgroup.com

io
primary, excess, and/or umbrella liability insurance policies issued by the defendants or
their predecessors or reinsureds with respect to certain environmental liabilities incurred
by the Port for property damages in the form of environmental contamination and/or
alleged damage to natural resources;
b.
Damages for breach of defendants' contractual obligations under the
6 11 Policies with respect to certain environmental liabilities;

7
C.
Damages for bad faith, and Consumer Protection Act violations;
d.
Costs and attorneys' fees incurred by the Port in bringing this action and
9 ~I pursuant to additional provisions of law.
THE PARTIES
10
11
2.
The Port is a Washington municipal corporation in good standing with its
12
principal place of business in Port Angeles, Washington. The Port is the owner and/or
13
lessee of substantial real property including property fronting on the Port Angeles Harbor
14
in Clallam County, Washington.
15
3.
The defendants are insurance carriers and/or successors for same, which at
16
all times relevant to this action were engaged in the business of selling or managing
17
claims for primary, umbrella and/or excess liability insurance polices. Upon information
18
and belief, none of the defendants are residents of or are domiciled within the state of
19
Washington, but all have transacted business within the state.
20
4.
Defendant The Travelers Indemnity Company ("Travelers") is a
21
corporation organized under the laws of the State of Connecticut, with its principal place
22
of business in Hartford, Connecticut. Travelers is, and at all times relevant to this
23
Complaint was, an authorized insurer in the State of Washington.
24
25
5.
Defendant Liberty Mutual Insurance Company ("Liberty Mutual") is a
corporation organized under the laws of the State of Massachusetts, with its principal
THE NADLER LAW GROUP PLLc
Pacific Building
PORT' S FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT - 3
206-621-1433
Iwaters@nadlerlawgroup.com
place of business in Dover, New Hampshire. Upon information and belief, Liberty
Mutual is the successor-in-interest to General Insurance Company of America. Liberty
Mutual is, and at all times relevant to this Complaint was, an authorized insurer in the
State of Washington.
6.
Defendant OneBeacon Insurance Company ("OneBeacon") is a
corporation organized under the laws of the State of Pennsylvania, with its principal
place of business in Canton, Massachusetts. Upon information and belief, OneBeacon is
the successor-in-interest to General Accident Fire and Life Assurance Company.
7.
Defendants Certain Underwriters at Lloyd's, London and Certain London
10
Market Companies (together "London Market Insurers" or "LMI") underwrote the
11
London Market Insurance policies at issue in this case. Exhibit A, attached hereto and
12
incorporated by reference, sets forth the names of the LMI defendants presently known
13
to the Port and, to the extent the Port has knowledge, their states or countries of
14
incorporation, and principal places of business. There may be other applicable policies
15
which have been issued by the LMI defendants to the Port from time to time, which are
16
presently unknown to the Port. Exhibit A may be amended as additional applicable
17
policies are discovered and as the currently known states or countries of incorporation
18
and the principal places of business are determined.
19
8.
Defendant National Indemnity Company ("NICO") is a corporation
20
organized under the laws of the State of Nebraska, with its principal place of business in
21
Omaha, Nebraska. NICO is, and at all times relevant to this Complaint was, an
22
authorized insurer in the State of Washington. Upon information and belief, NICO is the
23
assumption reinsurer of and/or the successor-in-interest to certain of the LMI defendants,
24
including Certain Underwriters at Lloyd's, London, with respect to the London Market
25
insurance policies at issue in this case.
THE NADLER LAW GROUP PLLC

Pacific Building
206-621-1433
9.
Defendants Certain Underwriters at Lloyd's, London are comprised of the
individuals, referred to as Names and organized into syndicates, who underwrote
portions of, or all of, one or more of the London Market insurance policies at issue in
this case. As discussed in more detail below, Equitas reinsured the liability of those
syndicates and Names, and under English law, Equitas has been statutorily novated for
the syndicates and Names with respect to the London Market insurance policies at issue
in this case. NICO is the assumption reinsurer of Equitas.
10.
In consideration of substantial premiums paid by the Port, the defendants
or their predecessors and/or reinsureds issued primary, umbrella and/or excess liability
10
insurance policies to the Port. General Accident Fire & Life Assurance issued primary,
11
umbrella and/or excess liability policies to the Port from prior to May 16, 1961 to 1969.
12
The LMI defendants issued primary, umbrella and/or excess liability policies to the Port
13
from at least 1966 through 1988. Travelers issued primary, umbrella and/or excess
14
liability policies to the Port from at least 1972 to 1978. General Insurance Company of
15
America issued primary, umbrella and/or excess liability policies to the Port from 1979
16 to 1982.
17
11.
NICO is liable to the Port for all benefits the Port is entitled to from certain
18
of the LMI defendants under the London Market policies at issue in this case. On
19
information and belief, NICO is also liable to the Port along with LMI for the bad faith
20
claims handling of the Port's claims.

JURISDICTION AND VENUE
21
22
12.
This Court has subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to RCW 2.08.010 and
23
RCW 7.24.010, et seq. Further, the Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this
24
declaratory judgment action because a real and justiciable controversy exists.
25
13.
This Court has personal jurisdiction because each of the defendants is an
THE NADLER LAW GROUP Pr.Lc

Pacific Building
206-621-1433
authorized insurer in the State of Washington and/or sold insurance to the Port in
Washington, or managed or reinsured policies sold to the Port in Washington.
14.
Venue is proper in this Court pursuant to RCW 48.05.220, because a
substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claims brought in this action
occurred in Clallam County, which is also the situs of the damaged property that has
given rise to the liability alleged herein.
JURY DEMAND
7
8
9
15.
The Port hereby demands pursuant to CR 38(b), trial by jury of twelve of
all issues so triable in this action.
THE POLICIES
10
11
16.
From prior to 1961, defendants or their predecessors or reinsureds sold to
12
the Port certain primary, umbrella and/or excess liability insurance policies, including
13
those policies set forth in Exhibit B, and possibly others ("Policies"). The Port's claims
14 I in this matter extend to any and all such additional policies as may become known to the
15
16
Port during the course of this litigation.

17.
The Port paid all premiums due and owing under the Policies and complied
17
with all applicable conditions of each of the Policies, including all conditions precedent
18
to coverage, if any.
19
THE ASSUMPTION REINSURANCE OF THE PORT'S LONDON MARKET
20
POLICIES
21
18. Equitas has been working since 1996 to achieve "finality" for the Names
22
(Certain Underwriters at Lloyd's, London) by extinguishing their long tail liability under
23
the 1992 and prior non-life liability insurance they underwrote ("Business").
24
25
19. By written agreement dated September 3, 1996 ("Reinsurance and Run-off

Contract"), Equitas Reinsurance Limited ("ERL") reinsured the Names by assuming all

Pacific Building
206-621-1433
of the Names' rights and obligations under the policies and undertaking to administer
2 II the Business.
3
20. By separate written agreement dated September 3, 1996 ("Retrocession
Agreement"), ERL retroceded the liability for the reinsurance and administration of the
run-off Names' Business to Equitas Limited ("EL") and EL assumed all of the Names'
rights and obligations under the policies and undertook to administer the Business and
7 Run-off.
8
21. By yet another separate written agreement dated November 10, 2006
(Retrocession and Run-off Agreement") EL retroceded its liability for the reinsurance of
10
ERL and the Names, along with the obligation to administer the run-off of the Names'
11
Business to NICO, and NICO assumed all of the rights and obligations under the
12
policies and undertook to administer the Business and Run-off, all of which was subject
13
to the English Court's approval of the Part VII Transfer and certain other conditions, all
14
of which have come to pass.
15
22. The November 10, 2006 Retrocession and Run-off Agreement also
16
provided that EL delegated responsibility for the administration of the run-off of the
17
Names' Business to Equitas Management Services Limited ("EMSL") subject to the
18
English Court's approval of the Part VII Transfer and certain other conditions, again all
19
of which have come to pass. Equitas Holdings Limited ("EHL") the owner of EL, ERL
20
and EMSL, promised in the same agreement to transfer full ownership of EMSL to
21
NICO subject to the same conditions which have come to pass. The agreement required
22
NICO to change the name of EMSL to some different name which does not include the
23
word "Equitas". NICO changed the name of EMSL to Resolute Management Services
24 Limited.
25
23.
Currently, NICO and/or Equitas have reinsured, indemnified, and assumed
THE NADLER LAW GROUP Pt,[,c

Pacific Building
206-621-1433
all responsibilities of the Names to deal directly with insureds, to service and administer
the contracts of insurance, and to adjust and pay the insured's claims for all benefits
under the insured's policies.
24.
Equitas Limited has publicly proclaimed to the Names' policyholders (of
which the Port of Port Angeles is one such policyholder), that "you will have no further
claims, as a matter of English law, against the Names who underwrote your policies at
Lloyd's. ... Instead of your claims against the Names you will have claims against an
FSA authorised company..." Similarly, Equitas Holdings Limited has proclaimed to the
Names that "... no Name has any further liability whatsoever, under English law, in
10
respect of 1992 and prior non-life Lloyd's liabilities. ... In the unlikely event that
11
Equitas becomes insolvent, no policyholder with an unsatisfied claim will be able to
12
enforce that claim in any court of the EEA to recover it from any Name. ... Now that we
13
have achieved finality under English law, [Equitas] believe[s] `the long day's task is
14
done......
15
25.
Since at least 2009, NICO's wholly owned subsidiary (Resolute
16
Management) has serviced portions or all of the Port's LMI insurance policies and
17
served as the primary point of contact for matters related to the Port's environmental
18
insurance claims against Certain Underwriters at Lloyd's, London.
19
26.
By operation of the foregoing, NICO and/or Equitas are the assumption
20
reinsurers of the Port (or are otherwise successors in interest to the Names and
21
Syndicates that underwrote the Port's policies), and thus are liable to the Port for all
22
benefits the Port is entitled to from defendants Certain Underwriters at Lloyd's, London,
23
under the Port's London Market insurance policies at issue in this case.
24
25 '
THE UNDERLYING ENVIRONMENTAL LIABILITIES
27.
The Port has incurred, and will continue to incur, liability for third party
THE NADLER LAW GROUP Pr.t,c
Pacific Building
206-621-1433
property damage to surface water, groundwater, sediments, and/or alleged damage to

2
natural resources as a result of historical operations and the resulting environmental
contamination at the Marine Trades Area ("MTA") Site, the K Ply Site, and the Western
Port Angeles Harbor ("Harbor") Site (together referred to as "the Sites").
5
6
28.
The Port's environmental liabilities at the Sites arise out of occurrences or
accidents that took place during the policy periods for each of the Policies.
29. Third party property damage, in the form of alleged damage to natural
resources as well as contamination of groundwater, surface water, and/or sediments
occurred during the policy periods for each of the Policies.
10
11
12
30.
The Port neither expected nor intended the releases or the resulting
property damage at issue prior to the inception of the Policies.

31.
The defendants breached obligations that they undertook in the Policies by
13
failing to comply with Washington regulations regarding such matters, by failing to -
14
promptly investigate the Port's claims, by failing to make coverage determinations, by
15
failing to fulfill their duties to defend and/or indemnify the Port for certain expenses it
16
has incurred as a result of its environmental liabilities at the Sites, and by generally
17
placing their own economic interests ahead of those of the Port, their insured.
DEFENDANTS' LIABILITY FOR EXPENSES OF SUIT
18
19
32.
In accordance with the policy terms and conditions, the Port notified the
20
defendants and/or their predecessors or reinsureds of the Port's claims with respect to the
21
MTA site (which was later divided into two sites: the MTA Site and the K Ply Site) in
22
1993. Defendant Travelers denied coverage for the Port's environmental liabilities at the
23
MTA site. Defendant Travelers has not made a coverage determination for the Port's
24
environmental liabilities at the K Ply site. Defendants OneBeacon, Liberty Mutual, and
25
LMI accepted the Port's tender of defense for the MTA and K Ply sites under
PORT'S FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT - 9
THE NADLER LAW GROUP Pt,Lc

Pacific Building
206-621-1433
reservations of rights, including the rights to deny coverage and seek reimbursement of
payments (including those defendants determine to be indemnity payments) made to or
on behalf of the Port. Defendants OneBeacon, Liberty Mutual, and LMI have failed to
make a determination regarding their duty to indemnify the Port under their respective
policies. Despite receiving notice of the Port's claims for the MTA site more than twenty
years ago, defendants OneBeacon, Liberty Mutual, and LMI have failed to make a
coverage determination regarding their duty to indemnify the Port under their respective
policies.
33.
In accordance with the policy terms and conditions, the Port notified the
10
defendants and/or their predecessors or reinsureds of the Port's claims with respect to the
.11
Harbor Site by 2011. Defendants Travelers, OneBeacon, Liberty Mutual, and LMI
12
accepted the Port's tender of defense for the Harbor Site under reservations of rights,
13
including the rights to deny coverage and seek reimbursement of payments (including
14
those defendants determine to be indemnity payments) made to or on behalf of the Port.
15
Despite receiving notice of the Port's claims for the Harbor site more than three years
16 . ago, defendants Travelers, OneBeacon, Liberty Mutual, and LMI have failed to make a
17
18
determination regarding their duty to indemnify the Port under their respective policies.
34.
After agreeing to defend the Port under reservations of rights, the
19
defendants have delayed and continue to delay making coverage determinations,
20
allowing the passage of time to potentially prejudice the Port's ability to prove elements
21
of coverage at trial.
22
35.
Defendants have breached their enhanced duty of good faith to their
23
insured by failing to promptly conduct an adequate and reasonable investigation and by
24
giving greater consideration to their own interests than those of their insured.
25
36.
Over the course of handling the Port's claims, the defendants violated

Pacific Building
206-621-1433
other standards provided for in WAC 284-30, et seq., which sets forth Washington's.
unfair claims settlement practices regulations.
37. The Port has been harmed by the defendants' bad faith actions and
inactions in handling the Port's claims. Among other things, the Port has incurred
attorney fees to address the wrongful actions and to bring this lawsuit to obtain the
benefits of its insurance policies because of the defendants' failure to respond to,
investigate, and/or make coverage determinations in response to the Port's claims.
8
9
38.
The Port was forced to bring this lawsuit to obtain the benefits of its
insurance policies issued by the defendants or their predecessors and/or reinsureds
10
because the defendants breached their obligations to investigate, defend, and/or
11
indemnify the Port pursuant to the terms of the Policies.
12
FIRST CLAIM FOR RELIEF
13
.(Damages)
14
39.
The Port incorporates the allegations of the above paragraphs as if fully set
15 I forth herein.
16
40. The Port was required to expend, and continues to be required to expend
17
substantial sums arising from its environmental liabilities at the Sites. The Port's
18
response costs include, but are not limited to, the cost to investigate and remediate the
19
contaminated groundwater, surface water and/or sediments, and to investigate and
20
respond to claims for alleged natural resource damages.
21
41.
The defendants and/or their predecessors or reinsureds assumed duties
22 I pursuant to the Policies to defend the Port and to indemnify it for certain costs and
23
expenses arising from the Port's environmental liabilities at the Sites. These defendants
24
have breached these duties.
25
THE NADLER LAW GROUP P[,Lc

Pacific Building
206-621-1433
lwaters@nadierlawgroup.com
SECOND CLAIM FOR RELIEF
(Declaratory Relief)
42.
4 II forth herein.
5
43.
The Port asserts that the defendants have obligations to defend and
indemnify the Port and to pay in full the costs which are being incurred and which will
continue to be incurred by the Port in connection with its environmental liabilities at the
Sites. By either explicitly denying coverage or by failing to make coverage
determinations, the defendants deny that they are bound by the obligations asserted by
10
11
the Port.
44.
Accordingly, an actual and justiciable controversy presently exists between
12
the Port and the defendants as to the defendants' obligations to defend and indemnify the
13
Port for all costs arising out of its environmental liabilities at the Sites.
14'
THIRD CLAIM FOR RELIEF
15
(Bad Faith)
16
45.
17 I forth herein.
18
46.
Under Washington law, an insurer must fulfill an enhanced obligation to
19
the insured as part of its duty of good faith. Insurers have broad obligations of fair
20
dealing and a responsibility to give due consideration to the insured's interests in all
21
matters. Defendants were obliged (a) to promptly conduct a thorough investigation and
22
to inform the Port of all developments relevant to claims of coverage, (b) to make a final
23
coverage determination, and (c) to refrain from actions demonstrating a greater concern
24
for their interests than the interests of the Port, their insured. Defendants breached their
25
enhanced duties of good faith by the actions and inactions alleged above.
THE NADLER LAW GROUP PLr.c

Pacific Building
206-621-1433
47. Defendants' bad faith conduct has proximately caused damage to the Port
in an amount to be proven at trial. The Port is further entitled to costs and attorneys' fees
expended in seeking to compel defendants to provide the full benefit of the insurance
4 policies.
5
FOURTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF
(Consumer Protection Act Violations)
48.
8 II forth herein.
9
49.
On information and belief, the defendants, their predecessors, and/ or their
10
agents have engaged in multiple unfair and deceptive acts including without limitation
11
one or more of the following: (1) Failing to adopt and implement reasonable standards
12
for the prompt investigation of claims; (2) Failing to affirm or deny coverage of claims
13
within a reasonable time; (3) Failing to complete the investigation of the Port's claims
14' within thirty days after notification of the claims; (4) Failing to make a coverage
15
determination in writing within fifteen working days after receipt by the insurer of fully
16
completed and executed proofs of loss; (5) Failing to commence an investigation within
17
fifteen days into their records, to determine the issuance, and relevant terms and
18
conditions of the lost policies; (6) Failing to provide to the Port facts known or
19
discovered during an investigation, including the identity of any witnesses with
20
knowledge of facts related to the issuance or existence of lost policies; (7) Failing to
21
provide the Port with copies of documents establishing facts related to the lost policies;
22
(8) Failing to commence investigation of an environmental claim within fifteen working
23
days after receipt of a notice of an environmental claim; (9) Failing to cooperate with
24
the Port in the investigation of the environmental claims at issue in this litigation; (10)
25
Failing to make payments, under their duty to defend, for costs reasonably incurred in an

Pacific Building
206-621-1433
investigation to determine the source of contamination, the type of contamination, and
the extent of the contamination; and (11) such conduct as shall appear through discovery
3 I and/or be proven at trial.

4
50.
The actions and/or inactions of defendants as alleged above constitute bad
5 I faith and unfair and deceptive business practices which were committed in the conduct
6 I of trade or commerce.
7
8
9
51.
The defendants are engaged in a business which affects the public interest
and their actions occurred in the conduct of trade or commerce.

52. Defendants' actions are prohibited by RCW 48.30.010, WAC 284-30-330,
10
et. seq., and WAC 284-30-930, et seq., and are per se violations of the Washington
11
Consumer Protection Act, RCW 19.86.
12
53.
Defendants' actions have a public interest impact because they violate
13
statutes and regulations containing legislative declaration of public interest impact and
14
because defendants' actions were conducted in the course of their business as part of a
15
pattern and practice that have and will be repeated in adjusting other insurance claims,
16
thereby affecting numerous insureds.
17
18
54.
Defendants' wrongful conduct has caused injury to the Port in its business
and property and has hindered its ability to defend itself adequately against the statutory
19 environmental liabilities.
20
55.
Defendants are liable for actual damages in an amount to be proven at trial;
21
the costs of this litigation, including attorneys' fees; and exemplary damages to the extent
22
provided by RCW 19.86.090.
23
FIFTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF
24
(Attorney Fees)
25
56.

Pacific Building
206-621-1433
1 II forth herein.
57. As a consequence of the Port having to bring suit to obtain the benefits of
2
3
its insurance coverage under the Policies, the defendants are liable to the Port for the
attorney fees and costs the Port incurred in bringing this suit and any petition for further
relief to enforce the orders and judgments entered during this action.
REQUEST FOR RELIEF
6
7
Wherefore, the Port of Port Angeles requests relief as follows:
58.
For judgment in favor of the Port and against the defendants, jointly and
severally, awarding damages in an amount sufficient to compensate the Port for all costs,
10
fees, and expenses incurred in responding to and defending the environmental liabilities
11
at the Sites through the date of trial in this action.
12
13
59.
For a declaratory judgment confirming the defendants' joint and several
obligation to defend and indemnify the Port against all future claims, costs, damages, and
14' adverse judgments and awards arising from the environmental liabilities at the Sites.
15
60.
16
severally for the Port's damages caused by bad faith conduct in an amount to be proven
17
at trial;
61.
18
19
severally for exemplary damages to the extent provided by RCW 19.86.090;
20
62. For a judgment in favor of the Port and against the defendants, jointly and
21
severally, for attorneys' fees, expenses and costs incurred in this action as allowed under
22
Olympic Steamship, the Consumer Protection Act, and other applicable law;
23
63.
For prejudgment and post judgment interest on all sums awarded the Port;
64.
For such other and further relief as may be allowed by any provision of law
24 and
25
THE NADLER LAW GROUP Pt,Lc
Pacific Building
206-621-1433
or that this Court deems just and proper.
3i
DATED this
~ day of February, 2015.
4'
5',
6I
7'I
81
MarkS. Nadler, WSBA No. 18126

eWaters, WSBA No. 37034
John . Dolese, WSBA No. 18015, of Counsel
Attorneys for Plaintiff, Port of Port Angeles
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Pacific Building
206-621-1433

THE PORT OF PORT ANGELES v. CERTAIN UNDERWRITERS AT LLOYD'S LONDON Et Al Complaint

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

THE PORT OF PORT ANGELES v. CERTAIN UNDERWRITERS AT LLOYD'S LONDON Et Al Complaint

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Case 3:15-cv-05180-KLS Document 1-2 Filed 03/26/15 Page 1 of 33

Case 3:15-cv-05180-KLS Document 1-2 Filed 03/26/15 Page 2 of 33

BARBARA CHF36ST'ENSEN CLER4C

'1'HE PORT OF POR7' ANGrLES,

CERTAIN UNDERWRITERS AT LLOYD'S,

PORT OF PORrI' ANGELES'

TE-IE;NADi.f:[t LAW GROUPi>i,i,c

720 Third Avcuuc, Suitc 1400

Case 3:15-cv-05180-KLS Document 1-2 Filed 03/26/15 Page 3 of 33

LII3ER'I'Y MUTUAL INSURANCE

complaint alleges as follows:

including environ>nental response costs irleurred by the Port in respond'zng to alleged

attorneys` fces incurred by

Port in bringing this action pursuant to additional provisions

The Port is a Washington municipal corporation in good standing with its

T'1-!C NADLL'R LAW GROUP ri-i,c

STsATTLIi, WASI-IINGTON 98104

Case 3:15-cv-05180-KLS Document 1-2 Filed 03/26/15 Page 4 of 33

Clallam Cotlnty, Waslaington,

In consideration of substantial premiums paid by the Port, the defendants or

On iliformation aiid belief, Liberty Muttlal Insurarlce Coinpany ("Liberty

Mutual") is the successor in interest to General Insui-arlce Company of Anierica. On

information and belief, Onel3eacon insurance company ("4nel3eacon") is the successor in

interest to General Accident Fire and Life Assurance Corporation.

rxhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated by reference, sets forth the

1<nowledge, their states or countrles of lIlco2poration, and principal places of busincss.

'i'1IG NAllLER LAW GI2UUP ri,t,c

720 Third Avcnuc, Suite 1400

Case 3:15-cv-05180-KLS Document 1-2 Filed 03/26/15 Page 5 of 33

each sold insurance to the Port in Washington.

Venue is proper in this Court pursuant to RCW 48.05.220 because a

rise to tlie liability alleged herein.

coverage foi- each defendant.

with all applicable conditions of cacli of the Policies.

THE ENVII20NMENTAL LIABILITIES

Case 3:15-cv-05180-KLS Document 1-2 Filed 03/26/15 Page 6 of 33

Thc Environmental Claimants allege property damage caused by among

"I-Iazardous Substances") allegedly produced, generated, deposited or disposed on property

Substances have damaged or threatcn to damage the groundwater, sediments, surface

plesent an ilnlninent and substantial danger to the public health or welfare.

public hcaltli or welfare, and to remediate eiivironinental contaniination and property

damage whicli was uncovered.

wliich the defendants or their predcccssors sold to the Port.

The dcfendants brcached obligations that they undertook in the Policies by

TE-IL'NADLE,R LAW C;RCIUPrt.i.c

720 Tliird Avenuc, suitc 1400

Case 3:15-cv-05180-KLS Document 1-2 Filed 03/26/15 Page 7 of 33

DrFENDANTS' LIABILITY FOR EXPENSES OF SUIT

defendants have failed to nlake coverage determinations regarding their indemnity

adequate and reasonable investigatioli, by failing to niake a coverage determination, and by

Tl IE NADL,GR LAW GROUPri,i.c

Case 3:15-cv-05180-KLS Document 1-2 Filed 03/26/15 Page 8 of 33

FIRST CLAIM FOR RELIrF

'1"he Port incol-porates the allegations of paragraplls 1 tluough 18, as if fully

set folrth herein.

The Port was required to expend, and continues to bc required to expend

SFCOND CLAZM FOR RELIFF

The Port incorporates the allegations of paragraphs I lhroug1121, as if fillly

set forth herein.

eontinue to bc incurred by the Port in connection with the Environmental Liabilities. By

- PHE NAI)1.ER L,AW GROUPi>u.c

SI.iATTLE, VdASHING'rolJ 98104