Free Motion for Summary Judgment - District Court of Connecticut - Connecticut

B Case 3:03-cv-00416-PCD Document 21 Filed O1/31/2005 Page 1 of 3
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT
i I
5 i
i JACK WILLIAM DUNLAP, )
V Plaintiffs, )
I v. g Case No. 303CV0416 PCD
HARTFORD INSURANCE COMPANY ) r
OF ILLINOIS, )
Defendant. g

DEFENDANT HARTFORD’S
MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Defendant, Hartford Insurance Company of Illinois ("Hartford"), by and through its
counsel, respectfully moves for summary judgment in its favor based on the clear and
unambiguous provisions of the insurance policy at issue in this litigation. Pursuant to those
provisions, Hartford has no liability to the Plaintiffs because (1) the claims for which coverage is
sought were not first made during the policy period; (2) those claims and potential claims may
i not be deemed first made during the policy period; and (3) the policy’s regulatory exclusion
precludes coverage.
In this litigation, Plaintiffs, former directors and oficers of Connecticut Bank of
Commerce ("CBC"), allege that Hartford breached the terms of an insurance policy it issued to
CBC and seek a declaration that the policy covers certain claims that have been, "or may be,"
asserted against Plaintiffs by third parties. The insurance policy at issue is a "claims-made"
policy, providing coverage only for Claims that are or may be deemed first made between 12:01
Oral Argument Requested

V Case 3:03-cv-00416-PCD Document 21 Filed O1/31/2005 Page 2 of 3
i a.m. on July 1, 2001 and 12:01 a.m. on July 1, 2002. Plaintiffs seek coverage for claims that
. were actually made in October 2002 and November 2002. Plaintiffs also seek a declaration of
coverage for "future claims," including a "Threatened Shareholder Action" that have not yet
been made. Plaintiffs’ arguments cannot be supported either by the express terms of the
{ contract or by Connecticut law interpreting those terms.
t The grounds for Hartford’s Motion are set forth more fully in the annexed Memorandum
of Law, which is incorporated by reference herein.
WHEREFORE, for the foregoing reasons and for those set forth in the accompanying
Memorandum of Law, Defendant Hartford Insurance Company of Illinois respectfully asks the
_ Court to grant its Motion for Summary Judgment.
I Dated: December 3, 2004 Respectfully submitted, {
. 1 · rrlff ’
W. Jo ilson (ct22292)
jwils •;· @tylercooper. com
William H. Champlin III (ct04202)
( [email protected]
i TYLER COOPER & ALCORN, LLP
185 Aslyum Street
CityPlace/3 5th Floor
Hartford, CT 06103-3488
(860) 725-6200
Fax (860) 278-3802
Attorneys for Dekndant
Harford Insurance Company of Illinois
Of Counsel: Alan J. Joaquin
Alison M. J arandeh
DRINKER BIDDLE & REATH
1500 K Street N.W.
Suite 1 100
Washington, D.C. 20005
(202) 842-8800
Fax (202) 842-8465 I
- 2 -

I Case 3:03-cv-00416-PCD Document 21 Filed O1/31/2005 Page 3 of 3
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT
MARSHALL ASCHE, STEVEN B. LEVINE, )
§ TIMOTHY S. REED, MARCIAL CUEVAS and )
, JACK WILLIAM DUN LAP, )
t
r I
{ Plaintiffs, )
)
v. ) Case No. 303CV0416 PCD
)
HARTFORD INSURANCE COMPANY ) CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
OF ILLINOIS, )
I
Defendant. )

W. Joe Wilson, an attorney admitted to practice in the United States District Court for the
District of Connecticut certifies, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1746, under penalty of perjury, that on
December L 2004, I served the attached Motion for Summary Judgment upon all counsel of
record in this action by depositing true copies of the same, each enclosed in a pre—paid envelope,
in a depository maintained by the United States Postal Service in the City and State of
Connecticut, addressed to the following at the address provided by each for that purpose, to wit:
Charles A. Stewart, III
Stewart Occhipinti LLP
1350 Broadway, Ste. 2200
New York, NY 10018
Richard P. Weinstein
Weinstein & Wisser P.C.
29 South Main Street, Suite 207
West Hartford, CT 06107
1
Dated: December; 2004 I V I , . Z `I
I » _ Au_ AI villa,
w. Joe Wilson
- 3 -