Facts
In Nautilus Insurance Co. v. Acacia Mobile Home Park LLC, No. 23-CV-2072 JLS (SBC) (S.D. Cal. 11/7/2024), Nautilus issued to Acacia, an owner of a mobile home park, a commercial general liability insurance policy that included a habitability exclusion that, after describing the excluded conduct—generally conduct related to the habitability of premises—included the following:
We will have no duty to defend or indemnify any insured in any action or proceeding alleging damages arising out of the above.
Holding
Where it was undisputed that the underlying complaint against Acacia included some allegations falling within the exclusion, the court held that, applying the catch-all provision, Nautilus had no duty to defend or indemnify Acacia for any part of the complaint, even assuming some of the allegations did not otherwise fall with the habitability elements of the exclusion. In other words, if any part of the damages sought in a suit fall within the substance of the exclusion, all of the damages sought in the suit are excluded.
.