No, I do not believe that the trial Court erred when it found that Illinois National “pollution exclusion” clause precluded coverage in the case between United Milwaukee and Advanced Waste. In order to make a successful claim, Advanced Waste Service Inc. would have had to make a clear argument that the language of the “total pollution exclusion” does not address the undisputed factual issues involved in this case and thereby mandating coverage. I do not believe the Court of Appeals should reverse the district courts ruling and grant a judgment mandating coverage. Therefore, the Trial court’s granting of summary judgment in favor of Illinois National should be upheld.
I. How to interpret the language of Insurance Policies
The language of insurance policies in nuanced with items that will be covered and items that will be excluded. The insurance policy analysis begins with the proposition that overage exists, and that coverage only ceases to exist in the exclusion applied the guiding exception that the drafter has the discretion to include. (Rec-11). Absent a specific exclusion, coverage exists. (Rec-11).
The court’s general goal in interpreting an insurance policy, is similar to their goal when interpreting a contract, which is to ascertain and carry out the party’s intentions. Hirschhoren v. Auto-Owners Insurance Company 338 Wis.2d 761, ¶ 22, 809 N.W.2d 529, 2012 WI 20 (2012). When making this analysis of the policy language, courts will try and best “interpret