the skin morning your honour's just in kidney for appellant admiral insurance company the issue before the court on this appeal is whether liberty insurance corporation of his code primary insurance coverage to four entities the state university construction fund crista construction the state of new york and sunni oneonta in connection with the supreme court action in a court of claims action arising out of a construction accident the other insurance language of the litter of liberty policy is imbedded in an additional insured indorsement and there's no dispute both imo in liberty have acknowledged that all four entities are additional insurance under both policies liberty's other insurance language says that the liberty policy is excess unless it's named insurance contract the contract require only dishman for coverage to be disconnected that's correct it's name insurance connected resteal if that contract requires primary concurrent or primary noncontributing the whole question is what if anything do those views cause after  thank you all right i believe you have accurately synthesise the issue this this appeal does in fact turn on the meaning of the language beginning in comparison to and i agree with your honor it does not in our other in an industry of which the commercial general liability carriers are extraordinarily custom to the relationships between generals owners properties generals and subs and sub contractors in the interaction of the labor law which governs most industrial accidents on construction sites which casts the owner and the general in  strict liability for the injuries incurred by others on the work site violations section two hundred two four to the labor law and so these are rangelands insurance arrangements that recognize layers of protection are they of christa of schenectady those that are quoted dish will insurance under your policy right i don't necessarily agree with your honor's what they should are in comparison to additional ensure it own policy or policy who is see who are the dish will insurance under your policy i bow to your are misunderstood your question get the additional insurance or are entities i mentioned and the reference to you do you do understand that they may have their own policy or policies do you not know question your who then is it not in comparison to the additional insurance own policies that one discovers whether one is excess or prim that's where i part ways with your order because i don't be in comparison language is not a modifier of the prefatory language at the outset of the other provision that provides as a default that the liberty policies excess there is no modifier of there's no limiting language in that phrase in comparison to it doesn't say but the exception only applies to the additional insured own policies or this exception does not apply where you're an additional insured under another paula let's let me see if i understand your understanding of this relationship as you read the contract and you agree that your so then there is say there is an injury and the individuals in one injury and the injuries got a potential liability of two million dollars right then if your policies primary you pay a million that's your susie and then christina is the access right well there you are and you've effectively reduce the coverage of the accident from what would have been if it's if it's the way liberty reads it to three million dollars for three million dollars you and liberty than christmas care each a million oh wait a second i think if you do the math you find this to be the case to come primary for a million and then crystal you produce the coverage for all these folks by million bucks under your calculation i respectfully disagree or do i don't think that's accurate because the fact that admiral and liberty are coprime me doesn't reduce the limits it means that we share it fifty fifty dollars fifty fifty up to two million and then christmas coverage will come and now it just so happens it's connected he and capital also have excess policies that may come into play before anyone reaches christer but co primary co primary does not reduce the that the bottom line here ours is that there there is no limiting language in the in comparison phrase and it's not an independent clause it doesn't stand on its own it has no verb it can't be a sentence what we do with it it serves as a modifying role to the exception language that comes before the new york requires us to give it some meaty i would submit to the court that its meaning is part of the description of what needs to be in the underlying contract in order to trigger the exception he saith i and i may be confused the in comparison clause deals with the policies of the sub of the sub sub contractors himself and you say does not limit the unless clauses making of the two major insurance companies co co insurers join and what this court needs to do is look at the schenectady contract and determine is the exception triggered once the exceptions triggered that's the end of the analysis you would have made and the it negates the excess language and liberties  you would agree with that the outgroup policy is not the policy of christie or the state defendants is they're not they're not the named insurance there are additional insurance right that's correct you're looking for  the schenectady contract says coverage for additional insurers shall apply on a primary and non controlling this is before any other insurance yourself insurance including any deductible maintained provided by the additional insurance that's correct  and for that reason and then there's a second paragraph in the contract that reiterates that point for any insurance available to the additional shorts and because of that language that triggers the exception it negates the excess language and libert policy which renders the policy primary because you have two primary policies under the policy language and in new york more they should share equally and for that reason we seek reversal of district court thank you very much  analysis i think that the the phrasing is the key phrase the in comparison to the additional shorts on policy or policies i think it has to do something and but why does it say that a phrase has to do something how does it do what you want it to is the use of praise which says in the weather is shining that you wonder why it's being here but it doesn't do anything about what happens does something but i don't understand why it's language does what you say it does so what i would like you to do is explain to me why that language why that clause has effect you say the states provide states exists then it would be a comma there but there is a come in there so now you have to stand but why does in comparison if you take that as a separate clause why does it do what you say and limit the effect of the previous how does it work to limit you know i could understand if they said but this does not mean that we are quote primaries or something like that but why it doesn't say that whoa what does what it says do the this is a three successive clause trying to answer your honor's question the first clause says generally were accessed the then it says but even then your primary your coverage is primary only compared to the additional insured own policies not you josh will insurance on your policy is not is not capital admiral's insured your additional insurance are the general and the only right and therefore therefore your primary as to your own contractor right you know their primary to serve primary and they admit that you're an additional insurance on your policy right but so then it goes wrong then you and then those above you exactly and i would expect that for example the general contractor above us they probably would be next in line for the owners so if that's the way it stacks with the general expectations in fact the way that this is not required  right yes and in fact the average yes and arrows policy in fact contains a very specific indorsement that shows that their intent in their understanding was that they'd be primary and they admit that they provide primary coverage for both their person and for your guy right yes but if they then added the general they somehow think that your coverage then automatically becomes co primary with their and then the general is comes after yes it's an odd result it's not a result and not the expectations when you have the effect the commentators the work in this field d five that is what it would be enough result that their view of how these contracts work is contrary to admiral's understanding of how the industry works right yes yes unless you're owners have any further questions primary unless any of four or five scenarios apply one of them is where you have been added as an additional insured under someone else's policy you is defined to be the named insured and so i clause refers to the policies of you differently insured right so what does the policies of the additional leverage over say about primary and  none of those policies are in the record your honor but if they contain the standard iso commercial general liability coverage form the standard other insurance language says as i was reciting to to judge wesley our policy is primary unless any of the following circumstances apply one of those circumstances is if you define to be the named insured or added to another policy as an additional insured by attachment  endorsement and that's the basis on which there's a distinction between schenectady and all the upstream folks who are not named insurance on liberties policy so that particular exception wouldn't apply so that's the best answer i can give you your honor because i just don't have those policies but with the exception of the state that might be self insured and so that gets us in a whole nother realm and ok we have the benefit of your a