Opinion ID: 152248
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Ownership Argument

Text: Mid-Continent argues that the damages awarded against Bay Rock are not covered because HOC did not have an ownership interest in Striebeck No. 1. The terms of the Policies do not require HOC to have an ownership interest in Striebeck No. 1 for there to be coverage, and Mid-Continent does not cite any authority that supports such a proposition. Accordingly, we conclude that Mid-Continent's first argument is without merit. The Policies contain similar grants of coverage. The CGL Policy states that Mid-Continent will pay those sums that [Bay Rock] becomes legally obligated to pay as damages because of . . . `property damage' . . . . Similarly, the Umbrella Policy states that Mid-Continent will indemnify [Bay Rock] for ultimate net loss in excess of the retained limit because of . . . property damage. . . . The CGL Policy and the Umbrella Policy both define property damage, in relevant part, as: (1) Physical injury to tangible property, including all resulting loss of use of that property. . . .; or (2) Loss of use of tangible property that is not physically injured. Accordingly, to prove coverage, Bay Rock only had to show: (1) that it was legally obligated to pay the damages awarded against it; and (2) that the damages awarded were because of physical injury to tangible property. Nothing in the Policies require the claimantHOC to have an ownership interest in the property that was damaged for coverage to exist. To support its ownership argument, Mid-Continent also asserts that the underlying state lawsuit established that [HOC] suffered no injury in the blowout. This argument, however, does not show that HOC needed to have an ownership interest in Striebeck No. 1 for there to be coverage. Moreover, the underlying state lawsuit actually established the opposite of Mid-Continent's assertion because the state court jury found that HOC incurred losses and awarded it damages as a result. [5] Accordingly, HOC's lack of an ownership interest in Striebeck No. 1 did not defeat Bay Rock's claim for coverage.