New York “Additional Insured” and Supplementary Payments Indemnitee Defense

In Hargob Realty Associates, Inc. v. Fireman’s Fund Ins. Co., No. 2009-04856 (N.Y. 2nd App. Div. May 11, 2010), while the insured contractor’s CGL policy included a blanket “as per written contract” additional insured endorsement, the insured’s contract with the owner did not expressly require that the owner be named an additional insured on the insured’s CGL policy.  The trial court and the intermediate appellate court rejected the argument that the indemnity agreement in the written contract qualified as an additional insured requirement.  Additionally, the Supplementary Payments indemnitee defense provision does not provide liability coverage to the indemnitee unless the indemnitee also qualifies as an insured.