Opinion ID: 2057448
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 8

Heading: Failure to Plead

Text: Beck's first argument, however, is that Harleysville is procedurally barred from raising any exclusion under the umbrella policy. According to Beck, Harleysville had raised the issue of no coverage under [the] umbrella [policy], but [it] didn't identify any exclusions in the umbrella [policy]. Beck points out that, generally, exclusions in insurance policies are treated as affirmative defenses and therefore must be specifically pled. [21] We find no merit to Beck's assertion that Harleysville is barred, by a failure to plead, from raising the pollution exclusion in the umbrella policy. Harleysville attached both policies to its complaint, and the complaint sufficiently put Rybin and Beck on notice that Harleysville was claiming it was not liable for the Sachses' deaths under either policy. [22] It is apparent that Harleysville specifically pled only the general liability policy because it believed the umbrella policy was merely a monetary supplement to the general policy that incorporated the underlying policy's pollution exclusion. As will be discussed below, we find that view to be correct.