United States District Court, D. Connecticut
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION GRANTING PLAINTIFF VERMONT
MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
[DKT. NO. 16]
Vanessa L. Bryant, United States District Judge
Vermont Mutual Insurance Company (“Vermont
Mutual”) brings this action for declaratory relief
pursuant to Connecticut General Statutes § 52-29.
Vermont Mutual has now moved for summary judgment pursuant to
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56, asking the Court to hold
as a matter of law that Defendant Debra Samson's
homeowner's insurance policy created no duty to defend
Ms. Samson in a lawsuit filed against her by Defendant
Matthew Hebert, and no duty to indemnify her for a $125, 000
judgment entered in that case. [Dkt. No. 16 at 2]. Vermont
Mutual also seeks dismissal of Defendants' counterclaims
for declaratory relief, breach of contract, the violation of
the Connecticut Unfair Trade Practices Act
(“CUTPA”), Conn. Gen. Stat. § 42-110a,
et seq., the Connecticut Unfair Insurance Practices
Act (“CUIPA”), Conn. Gen. Stat. § 38a-315,
et seq., bad faith, and unjust enrichment. [Dkt. No.
16 at 15-20].
reasons that follow, Vermont Mutual's Motion for Summary
Judgment is GRANTED in all respects.
Mutual issued Policy No. HO170824444, Form HO 00 03 04 91
(the “Policy”), to Paul and Debra Samson, which
covered the period from October 6, 2013 to October 6, 2014.
[Dkt. No. 17-4, Declarations]. This policy covered the
residence located at 604 Stone Road, Windsor, CT 06095.
Id. The Policy provided the following liability
claim is made or a suit is brought against an
“insured” for damages because of “bodily
injury” . . . caused by an
“occurrence” to which this coverage applies, we
1. Pay up to our limit of liability for the damages for which
the “insured” is legally liable. Damages include
pre-judgment interest awarded against the
2. Provide a defense at our expense by counsel of our choice,
even if the suit is groundless, false or fraudulent. We may
investigate and settle any claim or suit that we decide is
appropriate. Our duty to settle or defend ends when the
amount we pay for damages resulting from the
“occurrence” equals our limit of liability.
[Dkt. 17-8, Homeowners 3 - Special Form, at 10].
Policy contains an exclusion for bodily injury that arises
out of or in connection with a business. [Dkt. No. 17-4,
Homeowners 3 - Special Form, at 11].
relevant section (“Section II - Exclusions”)
reads as follows:
Coverage E - Personal Liability . . . [does] not apply to
“bodily injury” . . . arising out of or in
connection with a “business” engaged by an
“insured.” This exclusion applies but is not
limited to an act or omission, a service or duty rendered,
promised, owed or implied to be provided because of the
nature of the “business.”
Id. The Policy is additionally subject to
Endorsement HO 04 96 04 91, which specifically addresses
coverage for a home day care business. It ...