1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA 

General Refractories Company, : 

 : 

 Plaintiff, : 

 : 

 v. : Civil Action No.: 2:04-cv-03509-EL 

 : (Hon. Edmund V. Ludwig) 

First State Insurance Co.; Westport : 

Insurance Corporation, successor to, or : JURY TRIAL DEMANDED 

fka Puritan Insurance Company; : 

Lexington Insurance Company; : 

Centennial Insurance Company; Granite : 

State Insurance Company; Potomac : 

Insurance of Illinois; Hartford Accident : 

and Indemnity Co.; Government : 

Employees Insurance Co.; Republic : 

Insurance Company; Sentry Insurance : 

Company, successor to, or fka Vanliner : 

Insurance Company fka Great SW Fire : 

Insurance Co.; American International : 

Ins. Co.; AIU Insurance Company; : 

Harbor Insurance Company; St. Paul : 

Travelers, successor to, or fka Aetna : 

Casualty & Surety Company; American : 

Empire Insurance Co.; ACE USA, as : 

successor to International Insurance : 

Company, : 

 : 

 Defendants : 

 

ANSWER AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES OF DEFENDANTS, 

LEXINGTON INSURANCE COMPANY, GRANITE STATE INSURANCE 

COMPANY, AMERICAN INTERNATIONAL INS. CO. AND AIU 

INSURANCE COMPANY, TO PLAINTIFF GENERAL REFRACTORIES 

COMPANY'S COMPLAINT, WITH COUNTERCLAIM AGAINST 

PLAINTIFF AND CROSSCLAIM AGAINST CO-DEFENDANTS

Defendants, Lexington Insurance Company, Granite State Insurance 

Company, American International Ins. Co. and AIU Insurance Company, 

Case 2:04-cv-03509-EL Document 59 Filed 11/01/04 Page 1 of 44
2

("Defendants"), by and through their attorneys, Marshall, Dennehey, Warner, 

Coleman & Goggin, and for their Answer and Affirmative Defenses to the 

Complaint for Declaratory Judgment and Damages filed by Plaintiff General 

Refractories Company, counterclaim against the Plaintiff, and Crossclaim against 

all other Defendants, state as follows: 

NATURE OF ACTION

1. Denied. After reasonable investigation, Defendants are without 

knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the 

allegations in paragraph 1, and therefore deny them and demand strict proof 

thereof. 

PARTIES

2. Denied. After reasonable investigation, Defendants are without 

knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the 

allegations in paragraph 2, and therefore deny them and demand strict proof 

thereof. 

3.-4. Denied. The allegations contained in paragraphs 3 and 4 pertain to 

defendants other than Defendants, and, accordingly, no response is required. To 

the extent that a response may be required, after reasonable investigation, 

Defendants are without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to 

Case 2:04-cv-03509-EL Document 59 Filed 11/01/04 Page 2 of 44
3

the truth of the allegations in paragraphs 3 and 4, and therefore deny them and 

demand strict proof thereof. 

5. Admitted. By means of further answer, Lexington Insurance 

Company is incorporated in the State of Delaware with its principal place of 

business at 200 State Street, 4th Floor, Boston MA 02109. 

6. Denied. The allegations contained in paragraph 6 pertain to a 

defendant other than Defendants, and, accordingly, no response is required. To the 

extent a response may be required, after reasonable investigation, Defendants are 

without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the 

allegations in paragraph 6, and therefore deny them and demand strict proof 

thereof. 

7. Admitted and Denied. It is admitted that Granite State Insurance 

Company's principal place of business is 70 Pine Street, New York, NY 10270. It 

is denied that Granite State is not a Pennsylvania company. By means of further 

answer, Granite State Insurance Company is incorporated in the State of 

Pennsylvania. 

8.-12. Denied. The allegations contained in paragraphs 8-12 pertain to 

defendants other than Defendants, and, accordingly, no response is required. To 

the extent a response may be required, after reasonable investigation, Defendants 

are without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of 

Case 2:04-cv-03509-EL Document 59 Filed 11/01/04 Page 3 of 44
4

the allegations in paragraphs 8-12, and therefore deny them and demand strict 

proof thereof. 

13. Admitted. By means of further answer, American International 

Insurance Company is incorporated in the State of New York. 

14. Admitted. By means of further answer, AIU Insurance Company is 

incorporated in the State of New York. 

15.-18. Denied. The allegations contained in paragraphs 15-18 pertain 

to defendants other than Defendants, and, accordingly, no response is required. To 

the extent a response may be required, after reasonable investigation, Defendants 

are without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of 

the allegations in paragraphs 15-18, and therefore deny them and demand strict 

proof thereof. 

19. Defendants neither admit, nor deny, the allegations contained in 

paragraph 19, as it contains no factual allegations to which a response would be 

required. 

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

20.-21. Denied. The allegations contained in paragraphs 20 and 21 are 

legal conclusions, to which no response is required, and the allegations contained 

therein are therefore denied. To the extent a response may be required, after 

reasonable investigation, Defendants are without knowledge or information 

Case 2:04-cv-03509-EL Document 59 Filed 11/01/04 Page 4 of 44
5

sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations in paragraphs 20 and 21, 

and therefore deny them and demand strict proof thereof. 

FACTUAL BACKGROUND

Underlying Asbestos-Related Claims Against GRC [Plaintiff]

22.-25. Denied. To the extent that the allegations contained in 

paragraphs 22-25 are legal conclusions, no response is required, and the allegations 

are therefore denied. To the extent that a response may be required, after 

reasonable investigation, Defendants are without knowledge or information 

sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations in paragraphs 22-25, and 

therefore deny them and demand strict proof thereof. 

The Defendants’ Obligations to GRC[Plaintiff]

26.-27. Denied. To the extent that the allegations contained in 

paragraphs 26 and 27 pertain to defendants other than Defendants, no response is 

required. To the extent that the allegations are directed toward the Defendants 

and/or a response may be required, after reasonable investigation, Defendants are 

without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the 

allegations in paragraphs 26 and 27, and therefore deny them and demand strict 

proof thereof. 

28.-31. Denied. To the extent that the allegations contained in 

paragraphs 28-31 pertain to defendants other than Defendants, no response is 

Case 2:04-cv-03509-EL Document 59 Filed 11/01/04 Page 5 of 44
6

required. To the extent that the allegations contained in paragraphs 28-31 pertain 

to Defendants, the allegations are legal conclusions, no response is required and 

the allegations are therefore denied. To the extent that a response may be required, 

after reasonable investigation, Defendants are without knowledge or information 

sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations in paragraphs 28-31, and 

therefore deny them and demand strict proof thereof. 

Exhaustion of Limits of [Primary] Insurance Policies

32.-33. Denied. After reasonable investigation, Defendants are without 

knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the 

allegations in paragraphs 32 and 33, and therefore deny them and demand strict 

proof thereof. 

Denial of Coverage Obligations

34. Denied. To the extent that the allegations contained in paragraph 34 

pertain to defendants other than Defendants, no response is required. To the extent 

that the allegations are directed toward the Defendants and/or a response may be 

required, after reasonable investigation, Defendants are without knowledge or 

information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations in paragraph 

34, and therefore deny them and demand strict proof thereof. 

35. Denied. To the extent that the allegations contained in paragraph 35 

pertain to defendants other than Defendants, no response is required. To the extent 

Case 2:04-cv-03509-EL Document 59 Filed 11/01/04 Page 6 of 44
7

that a response may be required, after reasonable investigation, Defendants are 

without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the 

allegations in paragraph 35, and therefore deny them and demand strict proof 

thereof. To the extent that the allegations are directed toward the Defendants, 

Defendants deny them and demand strict proof thereof. 

36.-37. Denied. After reasonable investigation, Defendants are without 

knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the 

allegations in paragraphs 36 and 37, and therefore deny them and demand strict 

proof thereof. 

38. Denied. To the extent that the allegations contained in paragraph 38 

pertain to defendants other than Defendants, no response is required. To the extent 

that a response may be required, after reasonable investigation, Defendants are 

without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the 

allegations in paragraph 38, and therefore deny them and demand strict proof 

thereof. To the extent that the allegations are directed toward the Defendants, 

Defendants deny them and demand strict proof thereof. 

Invalidity of the Asbestos-Related Exclusions in the Policies

39. Denied. To the extent that the allegations contained in paragraph 39 

pertain to defendants other than Defendants, no response is required. To the extent 

that a response may be required, the allegations are legal conclusions, no response 

Case 2:04-cv-03509-EL Document 59 Filed 11/01/04 Page 7 of 44
8

is required and the allegations are therefore denied. By way of further response, 

the policies are writings which speak for themselves and the "best evidence" of the 

terms thereof. The attempted characterizations of these writings, and/or the 

incomplete terms of said writings set forth and averred by the Plaintiff are denied 

and strict proof thereof demanded. By way of further response, after reasonable 

investigation, Defendants are without knowledge or information sufficient to form 

a belief as to the truth of the allegations in paragraph 39, and therefore deny them 

and demand strict proof thereof. To the extent that the allegations are directed 

toward the Defendants, the allegations are legal conclusions, no response is 

required and the allegations are therefore denied. To the extent that a response 

may be required, the policies are writings which speak for themselves and the "best 

evidence" of the terms thereof. The attempted characterizations of these writings, 

and/or the incomplete terms of said writings set forth and averred by the Plaintiff 

are denied and strict proof thereof demanded. By way of further answer, to the 

extent that the allegations are directed toward the Defendants, Defendants deny 

them and demand strict proof thereof. 

40. Denied. To the extent that the allegations contained in paragraph 40 

pertain to defendants other than Defendants, no response is required. To the extent 

that a response may be required, the policies are writings which speak for 

themselves and the "best evidence" of the terms thereof. The attempted 

Case 2:04-cv-03509-EL Document 59 Filed 11/01/04 Page 8 of 44
9

characterizations of these writings, and/or the incomplete terms of said writings set 

forth and averred by the Plaintiff are denied and strict proof thereof demanded. To 

the extent that the allegations are directed toward the Defendants, the policies are 

writings which speak for themselves and the "best evidence" of the terms thereof. 

The attempted characterizations of these writings, and/or the incomplete terms of 

said writings set forth and averred by the Plaintiff are denied and strict proof 

thereof demanded. 

41.-43. Denied. After reasonable investigation, Defendants are without 

knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the 

allegations in paragraphs 41-43, and therefore deny them and demand strict proof 

thereof. 

44. Denied. To the extent that the allegations contained in paragraph 44 

pertain to defendants other than Defendants, no response is required. To the extent 

that a response may be required, after reasonable investigation, Defendants are 

without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the 

allegations in paragraph 44, and therefore deny them and demand strict proof 

thereof. To the extent that the allegations are directed toward the Defendants, 

Defendants deny them and demand strict proof thereof. 

45. Denied. To the extent that the allegations contained in paragraph 45 

pertain to defendants other than Defendants, no response is required. To the extent 

Case 2:04-cv-03509-EL Document 59 Filed 11/01/04 Page 9 of 44
10

that a response may be required, the policies are writings which speak for 

themselves and the "best evidence" of the terms thereof. The attempted 

characterizations of these writings, and/or the incomplete terms of said writings set 

forth and averred by the Plaintiff are denied and strict proof thereof demanded. To 

the extent that the allegations are directed toward the Defendants, the policies are 

writings which speak for themselves and the "best evidence" of the terms thereof. 

The attempted characterizations of these writings, and/or the incomplete terms of 

said writings set forth and averred by the Plaintiff are denied and strict proof 

thereof demanded. 

46. Denied. After reasonable investigation, Defendants are without 

knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the 

allegations in paragraph 46, and therefore deny them and demand strict proof 

thereof. 

47. Denied. The allegations contained in paragraph 47 are legal 

conclusions to which no response is required, and the allegations are therefore 

denied. To the extent a response may be appropriate, after reasonable 

investigation, Defendants are without knowledge or information sufficient to form 

a belief as to the truth of the allegations in paragraph 47, and therefore deny them 

and demand strict proof thereof. 

Case 2:04-cv-03509-EL Document 59 Filed 11/01/04 Page 10 of 44
11

48.-50. Denied. To the extent that the allegations contained in 

paragraphs 48-50 pertain to defendants other than Defendants, no response is 

required. To the extent that the allegations are directed toward the Defendants 

and/or a response may be appropriate, the allegations contained in paragraphs 48-

50 are legal conclusions to which no response is required, and the allegations are 

therefore denied. By way of further answer, after reasonable investigation, 

Defendants are without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to 

the truth of the allegations in paragraphs 48-50, and therefore deny them and 

demand strict proof thereof. 

51.-53. Denied. The allegations contained in paragraphs 51-53 are 

legal conclusions to which no response is required, and the allegations are 

therefore denied. To the extent that the allegations are directed toward the 

Defendants and/or a response may be appropriate, after reasonable investigation, 

Defendants are without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to 

the truth of the allegations in paragraphs 51-53, and therefore deny them and 

demand strict proof thereof. 

54. Denied. To the extent that the allegations contained in paragraph 54 

pertain to defendants other than Defendants, no response is required. To the extent 

that the allegations are directed toward the Defendants and/or a response may be 

appropriate, the allegations contained in paragraph 54 are legal conclusions to 

Case 2:04-cv-03509-EL Document 59 Filed 11/01/04 Page 11 of 44
12

which no response is required, and the allegations are therefore denied. By way of 

further answer, after reasonable investigation, Defendants are without knowledge 

or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations in 

paragraph 54, and therefore deny them and demand strict proof thereof. 

55. Denied. The allegations contained in paragraph 55 are legal 

conclusions to which no response is required, and the allegations are therefore 

denied. To the extent that the allegations are directed toward the Defendants 

and/or a response may be appropriate, after reasonable investigation, Defendants 

are without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of 

the allegations in paragraph 55, and therefore deny them and demand strict proof 

thereof. 

56.-57. Denied. To the extent that the allegations contained in 

paragraphs 56 and 57 pertain to defendants other than Defendants, no response is 

required. To the extent that a response may be required, the policies are writings 

which speak for themselves and the "best evidence" of the terms thereof. The 

attempted characterizations of these writings, and/or the incomplete terms of said 

writings set forth and averred by the Plaintiff are denied and strict proof thereof 

demanded. By way of further answer, after reasonable investigation, Defendants 

are without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of 

the allegations in paragraphs 56 and 57, and therefore deny them and demand strict 

Case 2:04-cv-03509-EL Document 59 Filed 11/01/04 Page 12 of 44
13

proof thereof. To the extent that the allegations are directed toward the 

Defendants, the policies are writings which speak for themselves and the "best 

evidence" of the terms thereof. The attempted characterizations of these writings, 

and/or the incomplete terms of said writings set forth and averred by the Plaintiff 

are denied and strict proof thereof demanded. 

58. Denied. To the extent that the allegations contained in paragraph 58 

pertain to defendants other than Defendants, no response is required. To the extent 

that the allegations are directed toward the Defendants and/or a response may be 

appropriate, the allegations contained in paragraph 58 are legal conclusions to 

which no response is required, and the allegations are therefore denied. By way of 

further answer, after reasonable investigation, Defendants are without knowledge 

or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations in 

paragraph 58, and therefore deny them and demand strict proof thereof. 

COUNT I 

(Declaratory Judgment Versus All Defendants) 

59. The allegations contained in paragraph 59 constitute mere 

incorporation by reference of preceding allegations, for which no response is 

required. To the extent a response may be appropriate, Defendants repeat and 

incorporate by reference their responses to the allegations in paragraphs 1-58, as if 

they were fully set forth herein. 

Case 2:04-cv-03509-EL Document 59 Filed 11/01/04 Page 13 of 44
14

60. Denied. To the extent that the allegations contained in paragraph 60 

pertain to defendants other than Defendants, no response is required. To the extent 

that a response may be required, the policies are writings which speak for 

themselves and the "best evidence" of the terms thereof. The attempted 

characterizations of these writings, and/or the incomplete terms of said writings set 

forth and averred by the Plaintiff are denied and strict proof thereof demanded. By 

way of further answer, after reasonable investigation, Defendants are without 

knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the 

allegations in paragraph 60, and therefore deny them and demand strict proof 

thereof. To the extent that the allegations are directed toward the Defendants, the 

insurance policies allegedly issued by the Defendants to the Plaintiff are writings 

which speak for themselves and the "best evidence" of the terms thereof. The 

attempted characterizations of these writings, and/or the incomplete terms of said 

writings set forth and averred by the Plaintiff are denied and strict proof thereof 

demanded. By way of further answer, after reasonable investigation, Defendants 

are without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of 

the allegations in paragraph 60, and therefore deny them and demand strict proof 

thereof. 

61. Denied. To the extent that the allegations contained in paragraphs 61 

pertain to defendants other than Defendants, no response is required. To the extent 

Case 2:04-cv-03509-EL Document 59 Filed 11/01/04 Page 14 of 44
15

a response may be appropriate, the allegations contained in paragraph 61 are legal 

conclusions to which no response is required, and the allegations are therefore 

denied. By way of further answer, after reasonable investigation, Defendants are 

without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the 

allegations in paragraph 61, and therefore deny them and demand strict proof 

thereof. To the extent that the allegations are directed toward the Defendants, the 

allegations contained in paragraph 61 are legal conclusions to which no response is 

required, and the allegations are therefore denied. By way of further answer, after 

reasonable investigation, Defendants are without knowledge or information 

sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations in paragraph 61, and 

therefore deny them and demand strict proof thereof. 

62. Denied. To the extent that the allegations contained in paragraph 62 

pertain to defendants other than Defendants, no response is required. To the extent 

a response may be appropriate, the allegations contained in paragraph 62 are legal 

conclusions to which no response is required, and the allegations are therefore 

denied. By way of further answer, after reasonable investigation, Defendants are 

without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the 

allegations in paragraph 62, and therefore deny them and demand strict proof 

thereof. To the extent that the allegations are directed toward the Defendants, the 

allegations contained in paragraph 62 are legal conclusions to which no response is 

Case 2:04-cv-03509-EL Document 59 Filed 11/01/04 Page 15 of 44
16

required, and the allegations are therefore denied. By way of further answer, after 

reasonable investigation, Defendants are without knowledge or information 

sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations in paragraph 62, and 

therefore deny them and demand strict proof thereof. 

63. Denied. To the extent that the allegations contained in paragraph 63 

pertain to defendants other than Defendants, no response is required. To the extent 

a response may be appropriate, the allegations contained in paragraph 63 are legal 

conclusions to which no response is required, and the allegations are therefore 

denied. By way of further answer, after reasonable investigation, Defendants are 

without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the 

allegations in paragraph 63, and therefore deny them and demand strict proof 

thereof. To the extent that the allegations are directed toward the Defendants, the 

allegations contained in paragraph 63 are legal conclusions to which no response is 

required, and the allegations are therefore denied. By way of further answer, it is 

denied that the Defendants have breached any contractual duties and/or improperly 

refused to acknowledge any coverage obligations which may be or may have been 

owed to the Plaintiffs, and strict proof thereof is demanded. It is further denied 

that the Plaintiff have suffered and/or will continue to suffer harm from any alleged 

actions or conduct of the Defendants, and strict proof thereof is demanded. By 

way of further answer, after reasonable investigation, Defendants are without 

Case 2:04-cv-03509-EL Document 59 Filed 11/01/04 Page 16 of 44
17

knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the 

remaining allegations in paragraph 63, and therefore deny them and demand strict 

proof thereof. 

64. Denied. To the extent that the allegations contained in paragraph 64 

pertain to defendants other than Defendants, no response is required. To the extent 

a response may be appropriate, the allegations contained in paragraph 64 are legal 

conclusions to which no response is required, and the allegations are therefore 

denied and strict proof thereof demanded. By way of further answer, after 

reasonable investigation, Defendants are without knowledge or information 

sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations in paragraph 64, and 

therefore deny them and demand strict proof thereof. To the extent that the 

allegations are directed toward the Defendants, the allegations contained in 

paragraph 64 are legal conclusions to which no response is required, and the 

allegations are therefore denied. By way of further answer, after reasonable 

investigation, Defendants are without knowledge or information sufficient to form 

a belief as to the truth of the allegations in paragraph 64, and therefore deny them 

and demand strict proof thereof. 

65. Denied. To the extent that the allegations contained in paragraph 65 

pertain to defendants other than Defendants, no response is required. To the extent 

a response may be appropriate, the allegations contained in paragraph 65 are legal 

Case 2:04-cv-03509-EL Document 59 Filed 11/01/04 Page 17 of 44
18

conclusions to which no response is required, and the allegations are therefore 

denied and strict proof thereof demanded. To the extent that the allegations are 

directed toward the Defendants, the allegations contained in paragraph 65 are legal 

conclusions to which no response is required, and the allegations are therefore 

denied. 

66. Denied. To the extent that the allegations contained in paragraph 66 

pertain to defendants other than Defendants, no response is required. To the extent 

a response may be appropriate, the allegations contained in paragraph 66 are legal 

conclusions to which no response is required, and the allegations are therefore 

denied. By way of further answer, after reasonable investigation, Defendants are 

without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the 

allegations in paragraph 66, and therefore deny them and demand strict proof 

thereof. To the extent that the allegations are directed toward the Defendants, the 

allegations contained in paragraph 66 are legal conclusions to which no response is 

required, and the allegations are therefore denied. By way of further answer, after 

reasonable investigation, Defendants are without knowledge or information 

sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations in paragraph 66, and 

therefore deny them and demand strict proof thereof. 

COUNT II 

(Breach of Contract) 

Case 2:04-cv-03509-EL Document 59 Filed 11/01/04 Page 18 of 44
19

67. The allegations contained in paragraph 67 constitute mere 

incorporation by reference of preceding allegations, for which no response is 

required. To the extent a response may be appropriate, Defendants repeat and 

incorporate by reference their responses to the allegations in paragraphs 1-66, as if 

they were fully set forth herein. 

68. Denied. To the extent that the allegations contained in paragraph 68 

pertain to defendants other than Defendants, no response is required. To the extent 

that a response may be required, the policies are writings which speak for 

themselves and the "best evidence" of the terms thereof. The attempted 

characterizations of these writings, and/or the incomplete terms of said writings set 

forth and averred by the Plaintiff are denied and strict proof thereof demanded. By 

way of further answer, after reasonable investigation, Defendants are without 

knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the 

allegations in paragraph 68, and therefore deny them and demand strict proof 

thereof. To the extent that the allegations are directed toward the Defendants, the 

insurance policies allegedly issued by the Defendants to the Plaintiff are writings 

which speak for themselves and the "best evidence" of the terms thereof. The 

attempted characterizations of these writings, and/or the incomplete terms of said 

writings set forth and averred by the Plaintiff are denied and strict proof thereof 

demanded. By way of further answer, after reasonable investigation, Defendants 

Case 2:04-cv-03509-EL Document 59 Filed 11/01/04 Page 19 of 44
20

are without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of 

the allegations in paragraph 68, and therefore deny them and demand strict proof 

thereof. 

69. Denied. To the extent that the allegations contained in paragraph 69 

pertain to defendants other than Defendants, no response is required. To the extent 

that a response may be required, the policies are writings which speak for 

themselves and the "best evidence" of the terms thereof. The attempted 

characterizations of these writings, and/or the incomplete terms of said writings set 

forth and averred by the Plaintiff are denied and strict proof thereof demanded. By 

way of further answer, the allegations contained in paragraph 69 are legal 

conclusions to which no response is required, and the allegations are therefore 

denied and strict proof thereof demanded. To the extent that the allegations are 

directed toward the Defendants, the insurance policies allegedly issued by the 

Defendants to the Plaintiff are writings which speak for themselves and the "best 

evidence" of the terms thereof. The attempted characterizations of these writings, 

and/or the incomplete terms of said writings set forth and averred by the Plaintiff 

are denied and strict proof thereof demanded. By way of further answer, the 

allegations contained in paragraph 69 are legal conclusions to which no response is 

required, and the allegations are therefore denied and strict proof thereof 

demanded. 

Case 2:04-cv-03509-EL Document 59 Filed 11/01/04 Page 20 of 44
21

70. Denied. To the extent that the allegations contained in paragraph 70 

pertain to defendants other than Defendants, no response is required. To the extent 

that a response may be required, the policies are writings which speak for 

themselves and the "best evidence" of the terms thereof. The attempted 

characterizations of these writings, and/or the incomplete terms of said writings set 

forth and averred by the Plaintiff are denied and strict proof thereof demanded. By 

way of further answer, the allegations contained in paragraph 70 are legal 

conclusions to which no response is required, and the allegations are therefore 

denied and strict proof thereof demanded. To the extent that the allegations are 

directed toward the Defendants, the insurance policies allegedly issued by the 

Defendants to the Plaintiff are writings which speak for themselves and the "best 

evidence" of the terms thereof. The attempted characterizations of these writings, 

and/or the incomplete terms of said writings set forth and averred by the Plaintiff 

are denied and strict proof thereof demanded. By way of further answer, the 

allegations contained in paragraph 70 are legal conclusions to which no response is 

required, and the allegations are therefore denied and strict proof thereof 

demanded. 

71. Denied. To the extent that the allegations contained in paragraph 71 

pertain to defendants other than Defendants, no response is required. To the extent 

that a response may be required, the policies are writings which speak for 

Case 2:04-cv-03509-EL Document 59 Filed 11/01/04 Page 21 of 44
22

themselves and the "best evidence" of the terms thereof. The attempted 

characterizations of these writings, and/or the incomplete terms of said writings set 

forth and averred by the Plaintiff are denied and strict proof thereof demanded. By 

way of further answer, the allegations contained in paragraph 71 are legal 

conclusions to which no response is required, and the allegations are therefore 

denied and strict proof thereof demanded. To the extent that the allegations are 

directed toward the Defendants, the insurance policies allegedly issued by the 

Defendants to the Plaintiff are writings which speak for themselves and the "best 

evidence" of the terms thereof. The attempted characterizations of these writings, 

and/or the incomplete terms of said writings set forth and averred by the Plaintiff 

are denied and strict proof thereof demanded. By way of further answer, the 

allegations contained in paragraph 71 are legal conclusions to which no response is 

required, and the allegations are therefore denied and strict proof thereof 

demanded. 

72. Denied. To the extent that the allegations contained in paragraph 72 

pertain to defendants other than Defendants, no response is required. To the extent 

a response may be appropriate, the allegations contained in paragraph 72 are legal 

conclusions to which no response is required, and the allegations are therefore 

denied. By way of further answer, after reasonable investigation, Defendants are 

without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the 

Case 2:04-cv-03509-EL Document 59 Filed 11/01/04 Page 22 of 44
23

allegations in paragraph 72, and therefore deny them and demand strict proof 

thereof. To the extent that the allegations are directed toward the Defendants, the 

allegations contained in paragraph 72 are legal conclusions to which no response is 

required, and the allegations are therefore denied. To the extent that a response 

may be appropriate, it is denied that any alleged reliance on the "asbestos-related 

exclusions" of the insurance policies allegedly issued by the Defendants to the 

Plaintiff, by any and/or all of the respective Defendants, set aside the Plaintiff's 

obligations to comply with the policy's or policies' conditions precedent to 

coverage, including the provision of timely notice of claim and/or demand for 

coverage. 

73. Denied. To the extent that the allegations contained in paragraph 73 

pertain to defendants other than Defendants, no response is required. To the extent 

a response may be appropriate, the allegations contained in paragraph 73 are legal 

conclusions to which no response is required, and the allegations are therefore 

denied. By way of further answer, after reasonable investigation, Defendants are 

without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the 

allegations in paragraph 73, and therefore deny them and demand strict proof 

thereof. To the extent that the allegations are directed toward the Defendants, the 

allegations contained in paragraph 73 are legal conclusions to which no response is 

required, and the allegations are therefore denied. To the extent that a response 

Case 2:04-cv-03509-EL Document 59 Filed 11/01/04 Page 23 of 44
24

may be appropriate, Defendants repeat and reallege, and incorporate by reference, 

as if fully set forth at length herein, each and every allegation contained in their 

Counterclaim for Declaratory Judgment Against the Plaintiff, infra. 

74. Denied. To the extent that the allegations contained in paragraph 74 

pertain to defendants other than Defendants, no response is required. To the extent 

a response may be appropriate, the allegations contained in paragraph 74 are legal 

conclusions to which no response is required, and the allegations are therefore 

denied. By way of further answer, after reasonable investigation, Defendants are 

without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the 

allegations in paragraph 74, and therefore deny them and demand strict proof 

thereof. To the extent that the allegations are directed toward the Defendants, the 

allegations contained in paragraph 74 are legal conclusions to which no response is 

required, and the allegations are therefore denied. To the extent that a response 

may be appropriate, Defendants repeat and reallege, and incorporate by reference, 

as if fully set forth at length herein, each and every allegation contained in their 

Counterclaim for Declaratory Judgment Against the Plaintiff, infra. 

75. Denied. To the extent that the allegations contained in paragraph 75 

pertain to defendants other than Defendants, no response is required. To the extent 

a response may be appropriate, the allegations contained in paragraph 75 are legal 

conclusions to which no response is required, and the allegations are therefore 

Case 2:04-cv-03509-EL Document 59 Filed 11/01/04 Page 24 of 44
25

denied. By way of further answer, after reasonable investigation, Defendants are 

without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the 

allegations in paragraph 75, and therefore deny them and demand strict proof 

thereof. To the extent that the allegations are directed toward the Defendants, the 

allegations contained in paragraph 75 are legal conclusions to which no response is 

required, and the allegations are therefore denied. To the extent that a response 

may be appropriate, it is denied that the Defendants have breached any contractual 

duties and/or improperly refused to acknowledge any coverage obligations which 

may be or may have been owed to the Plaintiffs, and strict proof thereof is 

demanded. By way of further answer, after reasonable investigation, Defendants 

are without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of 

the remaining allegations in paragraph 75, and therefore deny them and demand 

strict proof thereof. 

AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES

In response to the Plaintiff’s Complaint, Defendants assert the following 

affirmative defenses: 

FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

The Complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted against 

the Defendants. 

SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

Case 2:04-cv-03509-EL Document 59 Filed 11/01/04 Page 25 of 44
26

The causes of action alleged in the Complaint are barred as to the 

Defendants by the doctrine of estoppel. 

THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

The causes of action alleged in the Complaint are barred as to the 

Defendants by the doctrine of waiver. 

FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

The causes of action alleged in the Complaint are barred as to the 

Defendants by the doctrine of laches. 

FIFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

The Plaintiff has failed to join parties that are indispensable and/or necessary 

to the adjudication of this matter. 

SIXTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

This action is barred as to the Defendants by the failure of the Plaintiff to 

provide adequate and/or timely notice to the Defendants, as required under the 

terms of their alleged policies with the Plaintiff, with regard to the underlying 

actions for which Plaintiff now seeks contribution and/or allocation toward defense 

and/or indemnification. 

SEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

Case 2:04-cv-03509-EL Document 59 Filed 11/01/04 Page 26 of 44
27

All conditions precedent and/or subsequent to the triggering of liability, 

coverage or a duty to defend, if any, under the alleged insurance policies issued by 

the Defendants to the Plaintiff, have not been fulfilled. 

EIGHTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

Plaintiff has failed to perform all of its obligations under the policies 

allegedly issued by Defendants and, accordingly, Defendants are not obligated to 

contribute to the Plaintiff's coverage. 

NINTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

Defendants are under no duty to defend, indemnify or reimburse the Plaintiff 

for liability relating to the underlying suits based upon, and/or said duty is limited 

by, the terms, conditions, exclusions, definitions, and limitations (including 

applicable limits of liability) contained in the policies allegedly issued by the 

Defendants to the Plaintiff, and/or express provision(s) of law, and, said alleged 

duties are subject to any and all conditions precedent, deductibles, notice 

requirements, self-insured retentions, policy periods, requirements of exhaustion of 

other insurance, aggregates, per person and per occurrence limits of liability 

contained in said policies, and/or express provision(s) of law. 

TENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

The claims asserted against the Plaintiff in the underlying suits, and/or as 

related in the Complaint, do not constitute "bodily injury" or "personal injury" 

Case 2:04-cv-03509-EL Document 59 Filed 11/01/04 Page 27 of 44
28

within the meaning of the policies allegedly issued by the Defendants to the 

Plaintiff. 

ELEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

Some and/or all of the events for which coverage is sought do not constitute 

an "occurrence", were not an accident, were not fortuitous, contingent or unknown 

risks, or were events causing damages or bodily injury and/or personal injury 

which were "expected" or "intended" from the standpoint of the Plaintiff, as those 

terms are used and defined in the policies allegedly issued by the Defendants to the 

Plaintiff. 

TWELFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

Defendants have no duty to defend or indemnify the Plaintiff for the claims 

made against it in the underlying actions under the terms of the policies allegedly 

issued by the Defendants to the Plaintiff, because said claims come within the 

scope of the exclusions in said policies for liability arising from, or related to, 

asbestos or products containing asbestos, for asbestosis or any similar condition 

caused by asbestos, and for contamination, pollution and/or any other exclusion. 

THIRTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

The claims asserted against the Plaintiff in the underlying suits, and/or as 

related in the Complaint, are barred, in whole or in part, to the extent that any of 

the damages alleged in the Complaint occurred prior to the inception date or after 

Case 2:04-cv-03509-EL Document 59 Filed 11/01/04 Page 28 of 44
29

the expiration date of any of the insurance policies allegedly issued by the 

Defendants to the Plaintiff. 

FOURTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

No action shall lie against the Defendants unless, as a condition precedent 

thereto, there shall have been full compliance with all of the terms of the 

applicable, respective policies allegedly issued by the Defendants to the Plaintiff, 

and/or until the amount of Plaintiff's obligation to pay shall have been finally 

determined either by judgment against Plaintiff after actual trial, or by written 

agreement of the plaintiff, the claimant and the defendants. 

FIFTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

Plaintiff, by its action and/or inaction, has or may have failed to mitigate, 

minimize or avoid damages, and has or may have jeopardized the subrogation 

rights of the Defendants. 

SIXTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

To the extent that the Plaintiff's acts or failures to act, which give rise to the 

alleged injuries or exposure to the injurious conditions referenced in its Complaint, 

were in violation of law and/or public policy, the claims asserted in the Complaint 

may be barred in whole, or in part, as to the Defendants. 

Case 2:04-cv-03509-EL Document 59 Filed 11/01/04 Page 29 of 44
30

SEVENTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

To the extent that the claims alleged in the Complaint involve statutory, civil 

or criminal fines or penalties, such claims asserted in the Complaint may be barred 

in whole or in part. 

EIGHTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

Plaintiff's claims may be barred in whole, or in part, by the doctrine of 

unclean hands. 

NINETEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

To the extent that the claims for which coverage is sought arose out of 

hazards, conditions, risks or losses which were known to the Plaintiff, and/or 

already in progress, prior to or before the effective date/inception of any of the 

policies allegedly issued by any of the Defendants to the Plaintiff, all such claims 

are barred. 

TWENTIETH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

Coverage under any of the policies allegedly issued by any of the 

Defendants to the Plaintiff may be barred in whole, or in part, by the reason of an 

"other insurance", prior insurance, and/or non-cumulation of liability clause which 

may be contained in said policies. To the extent that the Plaintiff has other 

insurance, including self-insurance, against a loss covered by any policy, Plaintiff's 

claim is barred, in whole, or in part. 

Case 2:04-cv-03509-EL Document 59 Filed 11/01/04 Page 30 of 44
31

TWENTY-FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

Coverage under any of the policies allegedly issued by any of the 

Defendants to the Plaintiff may be barred in whole, or in part, to the extent that the 

Plaintiff is precluded by collateral estoppel from litigating issues that may have 

been decided in prior proceedings, res judicata, judicial estoppel or issue 

preclusion. 

TWENTY-SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

Plaintiff's claims are barred in whole, or in part, to the extent that the 

Plaintiff destroyed evidence, lost evidence, allowed evidence to be lost, suppressed 

evidence or failed to preserve evidence, including but not limited to, the policies of 

insurance which are alleged to have been issued by the Defendants to the Plaintiff. 

TWENTY-THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

To the extent that the Plaintiff seeks monetary recovery for fines, penalties, 

treble and/or punitive damages assessed against Plaintiff in the underlying actions, 

Plaintiff's claims are barred by the terms and conditions of the policies allegedly 

issued by each of the Defendants to the Plaintiff, and by public policy. 

TWENTY-FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

To the extent that the Plaintiff intentionally or negligently failed to disclose, 

concealed or misrepresented facts material to any known or claimed risk 

Case 2:04-cv-03509-EL Document 59 Filed 11/01/04 Page 31 of 44
32

underwritten by the Defendants, not covered under the respective policies allegedly 

issued by each of the Defendants to the Plaintiff, Plaintiff's claims are barred. 

TWENTY-FIFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

Defendants are under no duty to defend or indemnify the Plaintiff under the 

respective policies allegedly issued by each of the Defendants to the Plaintiff, for 

liability relating to the underlying suits, to the extent that any aggregate limits or 

any other policy limits are exhausted, or to the extent that any deductible, selfinsured retention or any primary or other applicable limits or prerequisites have not 

been paid by the Plaintiff and/or are not otherwise exhausted and hereby fully 

asserts all applicable policy limits, conditions and limitations. 

TWENTY-SIXTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

The respective policies allegedly issued by each of the Defendants to the 

Plaintiff do not provide coverage for any defense costs or settlements that are not 

necessary and reasonable. 

TWENTY-SEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

Plaintiff's claims for coverage under the insurance policies allegedly issued 

by each of the Defendants to the Plaintiff are barred to the extent that the liability 

coverage limits of the primary and/or underlying insurance policies may not be 

properly exhausted. 

Case 2:04-cv-03509-EL Document 59 Filed 11/01/04 Page 32 of 44
33

TWENTY-EIGHTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

Plaintiff's claims are barred in whole or in part to the extent that the Plaintiff 

has permitted the entry of default or similar judgments or has failed to adequately 

defend the underlying actions. 

TWENTY-NINTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

Plaintiff's claims are barred in whole or in part to the extent that the 

Plaintiff's claims seek indemnification for losses that have not yet arisen and/or for 

amounts that have not yet been paid. 

THIRTIETH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

Defendants are entitled to the benefit of, incorporate herein by reference, and 

reserve the right to invoke any additional defenses available to them pursuant to 

the terms, conditions, definitions, exclusions, endorsements, deductibles and limits 

of liability of the policies and/or the underlying policies to which the insurance 

policies allegedly issued by the Defendants to the Plaintiff follow form. 

THIRTY-FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

Inasmuch as the Complaint does not describe the alleged underlying claims 

with sufficient particularity to enable the Defendants to determine all of its legal, 

contractual and equitable defenses, Defendants reserve the right to amend and/or 

supplement their Answer and Affirmative Defenses to assert any and all pertinent 

affirmative defenses ascertained through discovery in this action. 

Case 2:04-cv-03509-EL Document 59 Filed 11/01/04 Page 33 of 44
34

THIRTY-SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

Defendants reserve the right to rely upon and assert any applicable defenses 

asserted by any of the other defendants in this matter. 

THIRTY-THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 

During the time period when the insurance policies allegedly issued by the 

Defendants to the Plaintiff were allegedly in effect, the Pennsylvania Insurance 

Department did not require the filing of manuscript endorsements. 

THIRTY-FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 

At all times relevant hereto, Defendants acted reasonably, appropriately and 

in conformance with any alleged contractual and/or statutory obligations it owed to 

its alleged insured. 

THIRTY-FIFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 

To the extent that the Plaintiff seeks coverage under any of the insurance 

policies allegedly issued to the Plaintiff by the Defendants, through an assignment 

of interest, coverage under the policies is barred because none of the Defendants 

have consented to any such assignment of interest. 

THIRTY-SIXTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 

Plaintiff has the burden of proving the existence, terms and conditions of any 

and all alleged policies issued by the Defendants to the Plaintiff. To the extent that 

Case 2:04-cv-03509-EL Document 59 Filed 11/01/04 Page 34 of 44
35

the Plaintiff fails to meet this burden, Defendants have no coverage obligations 

under any of the alleged insurance policies. 

DEFENDANTS' COUNTERCLAIM FOR DECLARATORY JUDGMENT 

AGAINST THE PLAINTIFF

Defendants, Lexington Insurance Company, Granite State Insurance 

Company, American International Ins. Co. and AIU Insurance Company, 

("Defendants"), by and through their attorneys, Marshall, Dennehey, Warner, 

Coleman & Goggin, for their Counterclaim for Declaratory Judgment against 

Plaintiff, state as follows: 

1. Defendants repeat and reallege, and incorporate by reference, as if 

fully set forth at length herein, each and every allegation contained in their Answer 

to Plaintiff's Complaint, and Defendants' Affirmative Defenses. 

2. Plaintiff, General Refractories Company is a corporation organized 

under the laws of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and has its principal place of 

business located at 225 City Avenue, Bala Cynwyd, Pennsylvania 19004. 

3. Plaintiff, through its Complaint, has tendered the defense and 

indemnity of numerous suits ("Underlying Actions, as defined in Plaintiff's 

Complaint) alleging injury due to Plaintiff's sale, manufacture, and/or distribution 

of asbestos containing materials. Plaintiff alleges that it engaged in the 

manufacture and distribution of products, including refractory products containing 

Case 2:04-cv-03509-EL Document 59 Filed 11/01/04 Page 35 of 44
36

asbestos, for the time period commencing in, but not limited to, the 1950s through 

the mid-1970s. 

4. Plaintiff has produced the following policies (hereinafter collectively 

referred to as "The Policies") with respect to the allegations set forth against 

Defendants in Plaintiff's Complaint: 

• Policy No. 6180-2501 issued by Granite State Insurance Company for the 

policy period August 1, 1980 to August 1, 1981; 

• Policy No. 75-104480 issued by AIU Insurance Company for the policy 

period August 1, 1985 to August 1, 1986; 

• Policy No. 5512818 issued by Lexington Insurance Company for the policy 

period February 1, 1979 to August 1, 1980; and 

• Policy No. 552 6337 issued by Lexington Insurance company for the policy 

period August 1, 1984 to August 1, 1985. 

5. The Policies contain endorsements and/or policy terms and conditions 

entitled "asbestos exclusion". 

6. The allegations in the Underlying Actions all fall exclusively within 

the scope of the "asbestos exclusion" contained in each of the Policies. 

7. Other terms and conditions in the Policies preclude coverage under 

the Policies for the allegations set forth in the Underlying Actions. 

Case 2:04-cv-03509-EL Document 59 Filed 11/01/04 Page 36 of 44
37

8. Upon information and belief, the Policies produced by Plaintiff are 

not the best evidence of such policies, nor are the Policies or some of them the full 

writings as issued by each company. 

9. Plaintiff has the burden to produce the entire Policies. 

10. Upon information and belief, other terms and conditions in the 

Policies, not produced by Plaintiff, preclude coverage under the Policies for the 

Underlying Actions. 

11. Defendants, Granite State Insurance Company, AIU Insurance 

Company and Lexington Insurance Company are entitled to judgment declaring 

that they have no duty to defend or indemnify Plaintiff in the Underlying Actions. 

12. Plaintiff has failed to produce a Policy issued by Defendant, American 

International Insurance Company. 

13. Plaintiff has the burden to demonstrate that American International 

Insurance Company issued a policy of insurance to Plaintiff. 

14. Defendant, American International Insurance Company is entitled to 

a declaration that it has no duty to defend or indemnify Plaintiff in the Underlying 

Actions. 

15. Alternatively, upon information and belief, any policies issued by 

Defendant, American International Insurance Company, to Plaintiff do not provide 

Case 2:04-cv-03509-EL Document 59 Filed 11/01/04 Page 37 of 44
38

coverage for the Underlying Actions in accordance with the terms and conditions 

set forth in any such policy(s). 

WHEREFORE, answering Defendants hereby request this Honorable Court 

to enter judgment: 

a.) in favor of the Defendants and dismissing the Plaintiff's Complaint 

with prejudice; 

b.) declaring that the insurance policies allegedly entered into between 

Plaintiff and each of the Defendants do not obligate the Defendants to defend or 

indemnify the Plaintiff in connection with the underlying suits; 

c.) declaring that Defendants have no obligation to Plaintiff under the 

insurance policies allegedly issued by the Defendants to the Plaintiff, or to any 

crossclaiming defendants; 

d.) declaring that Defendants are not liable under applicable law for 

attorney's fees or pre-judgment or post-judgment interest or costs; 

e.) in the alternative, and in the event that any coverage duties under any 

of the respective Defendants' alleged polices are found (such duties having been 

expressly denied) declaring that the Defendant or Defendants are entitled to 

apportionment of liability, indemnity and/or contribution from all Other Insurer 

Defendants and the Plaintiff for any covered claims; 

f.) awarding Defendants attorney's fees and costs in this action; and 

Case 2:04-cv-03509-EL Document 59 Filed 11/01/04 Page 38 of 44
39

g.) awarding Defendants such other and further relief as the Court deems 

just and proper. 

DEFENDANTS' CROSSCLAIM FOR DECLARATORY JUDGMENT 

AGAINST ALL OTHER CO-DEFENDANT INSURANCE CARRIERS

Defendants, Lexington Insurance Company, Granite State Insurance 

Company, American International Ins. Co. and AIU Insurance Company, 

("Defendants"), by and through their attorneys, Marshall, Dennehey, Warner, 

Coleman & Goggin, for their Crossclaim for Declaratory Judgment against all 

other Co-Defendant insurance carriers, states as follows: 

1. For purposes of this Crossclaim only, Defendants incorporate herein 

by reference, without admission or adoption, the allegations of the Plaintiff's 

Complaint, as if fully set forth herein. 

2. Defendants repeat and reallege, and incorporate by reference, as if 

fully set forth at length herein, each and every allegation contained in their Answer 

to Plaintiff's Complaint, and Defendants' Affirmative Defenses. 

3. Defendants deny that their alleged policies of insurance provide 

coverage for the alleged losses or that they breached any contractual provisions of 

said policies or that they are in any way liable to the Plaintiff. 

4. If it is determined that any and/or all of the Defendants have any 

defense and/or indemnity obligations to the Plaintiff in this action, which 

Case 2:04-cv-03509-EL Document 59 Filed 11/01/04 Page 39 of 44
40

obligations have been and are specifically denied, then Defendant's and/or 

Defendants' obligation or obligations may be subject to and limited by the 

obligations of the other defendants in this action, First State Insurance Co., 

Westport Insurance Corporation, Centennial Insurance Company, Hartford 

Accident and Indemnity Co., Government Employees Insurance Co., Republic 

Insurance Company, Sentry Insurance Company, Harbor Insurance Company, St. 

Paul Travelers, American Empire Insurance Co., ACE USA and One Beacon 

America Insurance Company (collectively "Other Insurer Defendants"), who may 

be liable over to each and/or any of the respective Defendants, by way of 

contribution, indemnity and allocation in accord with common law and the "other 

insurance" provisions of the insurance policies allegedly issued by the Defendants 

to the Plaintiff. 

5. Defendants seek a declaration that Plaintiff is not entitled to defense 

or indemnity under the insurance policies allegedly issued by the Defendants to the 

Plaintiff. However, to the extent that the Court should conclude that the Plaintiff is 

entitled to either a defense or indemnity under any of their policies, Defendants 

seek a declaration that it/they are entitled to contribution and/or rights of allocation 

from the Other Insurer Defendants. 

Case 2:04-cv-03509-EL Document 59 Filed 11/01/04 Page 40 of 44
41

WHEREFORE, answering Defendants hereby request this Honorable Court 

to enter judgment: 

a.) in favor of the Defendants and dismissing the Plaintiff's Complaint 

with prejudice; 

b.) declaring that the insurance policies allegedly entered into between 

Plaintiff and each of the Defendants do not obligate the Defendants to defend or 

indemnify the Plaintiff in connection with the underlying suits; 

c.) declaring that Defendants have no obligation to Plaintiff under the 

insurance policies allegedly issued by the Defendants to the Plaintiff, or to any 

crossclaiming defendants; 

d.) declaring that Defendants are not liable under applicable law for 

attorney's fees or pre-judgment or post-judgment interest or costs; 

e.) in the alternative, and in the event that any coverage duties under any 

of the respective Defendants' alleged polices are found (such duties having been 

expressly denied) declaring that the Defendant or Defendants are entitled to 

apportionment of liability, indemnity and/or contribution from all Other Insurer 

Defendants and the Plaintiff for any covered claims; 

f.) awarding Defendants attorney's fees and costs in this action; and 

Case 2:04-cv-03509-EL Document 59 Filed 11/01/04 Page 41 of 44
42

g.) awarding Defendants such other and further relief as the Court deems just and 

proper. 

 Marshall, Dennehey, Warner, Coleman & Goggin

 Attorneys for Defendants, Lexington Insurance 

 Company, Granite State Insurance Company, 

 American International Ins. Co., & AIU Insurance 

 Company 

 By: Eric A. Fitzgerald_________________ 

 Eric A. Fitzgerald, Esquire 

 Pennsylvania I.D. No.: 72590 

 

 1845 Walnut Street 

 Philadelphia, PA 19103 

 (215) 575-2688 

 William K. Conklin________________ 

 William K. Conklin, Esquire 

 Pennsylvania I.D. No.: 75881 

 1845 Walnut Street 

 Philadelphia, PA 19103 

 (215) 575-2600 

Dated: November 1, 2004. 

Case 2:04-cv-03509-EL Document 59 Filed 11/01/04 Page 42 of 44
43

ANSWER TO CROSSCLAIMS

Defendants, by way of answer to any crossclaims that have been or may be 

asserted against each and every one of them, hereby denies each and every 

allegation thereof. 

 Marshall, Dennehey, Warner, Coleman & Goggin

 Attorneys for Defendants, Lexington Insurance 

 Company, Granite State Insurance Company, 

 American International Ins. Co., & AIU Insurance 

 Company 

 By: Eric A. Fitzgerald_____________ 

 Eric A. Fitzgerald, Esquire 

 Pennsylvania I.D. No.: 72590 

 

 1845 Walnut Street 

 Philadelphia, PA 19103 

 (215) 575-2688 

 William K. Conklin________________ 

 William K. Conklin, Esquire 

 Pennsylvania I.D. No.: 75881 

 1845 Walnut Street 

 Philadelphia, PA 19103 

 (215) 575-2600 

Dated: November 1, 2004. 

Case 2:04-cv-03509-EL Document 59 Filed 11/01/04 Page 43 of 44
44

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

 Marshall, Dennehey, Warner, Coleman & Goggin

 Attorneys for Defendants, Lexington Insurance 

 Company, Granite State Insurance Company, 

 American International Ins. Co., & AIU Insurance 

 Company 

 By: Eric A. Fitzgerald___________ 

 Eric A. Fitzgerald, Esquire 

 Pennsylvania I.D. No.: 72590 

 

 1845 Walnut Street 

 Philadelphia, PA 19103 

 (215) 575-2688 

 William K. Conklin________________ 

 William K. Conklin, Esquire 

 Pennsylvania I.D. No.: 75881 

 1845 Walnut Street 

 Philadelphia, PA 19103 

 (215) 575-2600 

Dated: November 1, 2004. 

Case 2:04-cv-03509-EL Document 59 Filed 11/01/04 Page 44 of 44