The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

Dic Concrete Corp. (D) and Underhill Construction Corp. (D) were parties to a contract with the Port Authority for the performance of concrete construction in connection with the construction of the World Trade Center. St. Paul (D) issued to Dic-Underhill (D) under a Contractors' Equipment insurance policy insuring certain portable equipment against 'all risks of physical loss or damage from any external cause,' with certain enumerated exceptions. A mobile compressor was allegedly stolen from the World Trade Center jobsite and was never returned. Dic-Underhill (D) notified American Home Assurance Co., the insurance carrier of the Port Authority, and its contractor, Dic-Underhill, (D) for all work at the World Trade Center. From August 16, 1973, until March 31, 1975, Dic-Underhill (D) and the Port Authority believed in good faith that the claim would be covered by American. On March 31, 1975, Dic-Underhill (D) was informed that the loss of the compressor was outside the scope of property covered by the Port Authority policy of builder's risk insurance. The claim was disallowed. On April 29, 1975, Dic-Underhill (D) notified its insurance company St. Paul (D). St. Paul (D) concluded that the loss did not fall within the protection of the policy. On December 2, 1975, P commenced this suit. Dic-Underhill (D) brought a third-party complaint against St. Paul (D) insurer for denying the contractors' insurance claim on the compressor. St. Paul (D) moved for summary judgment, arguing that Dic-Underhill (D), as the insured, and the Port Authority, as subrogee) have failed to comply with that provision of their insurance contract which requires that the insured notify St. Paul (D) of any loss 'as soon as practicable.'

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.

Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.