Lawyers for Silverstein Properties have strongly denied Swiss Re’s assertions that the form provided by Willis, which bound the insurers to cover the destruction of the World Trade Center, specified that the loss of both towers would be one occurrence. (See IJ Website May 9)
The reply to Swiss Re’s motion puts the world’s third largest insurance broker squarely in the middle of the dispute, even though it is not a party to the lawsuit, at least not yet.
The actions of Willis broker Timothy Boyd are at the heart of this new dispute over the $3.5 billion Silverstein is seeking to recover for the collapse of the second tower. According to Swiss Re, Boyd originally indicated that the “WilProp” form was used to bind coverage. It apparently defines a loss as one event or a series of events, which would support Swiss Re’s one occurrence contentions.
The contents of its motion charge that Boyd was pressured to change his opinion when he gave deposition testimony that indicated that a Travelers form was used, which would be more favorable to the “two-occurrences” theory asserted by Silverstein.
Silverstein’s lawyers have claimed that Willis’ own attorneys had assured them that the Travelers form was used.
Willis has so far issued no statement concerning the dispute.
Was this article valuable?
Here are more articles you may enjoy.