In T.H.E. Insurance Co. v. Olson, Nos. 22-1143 et al. Cons. (7th Cir. October 17, 2022) the Seventh Circuit affirmed a Wisconsin District Court that granted the plaintiff-insurance company’s motion for judgment on pleadings, The insurance carrier’s action sought a declaration that it owed no duty to defend or indemnify its insured, a fireworks company, in an underlying action by two individuals who incurred injuries. Timothy Olson and Todd Zdroik sustained injuries while volunteering at Fourth of July fireworks in 2018. Fireworks from the insured Spielbauer Fireworks Company exploded prematurely, severely burning each. Both towns used teams of volunteers to put on their Fourth of July displays. The record showed that policy in question excluded coverage for injuries sustained by fireworks shooters hired to perform fireworks displays or other persons assisting or aiding in displays of fireworks regardless of whether the individuals are employed by the insured, any shooter or assistant. The general and excess liability insurance policies in question contained a one sentence “Shooters Endorsement” exclusion that read:
This policy shall NOT provide coverage of any kind (including but not limited to judgment costs, defense, costs of defense, etc.) for any claims arising out of injuries or death to shooters or their assistants hired to perform fireworks displays or any other persons assisting or aiding in the display of fireworks whether or not any of the foregoing are employed by the Named Insured, any shooter or any assistant.
The key issue on appeal was whether the exclusion extends to any and all volunteers or only to those assisting hired shooters or hired assistants. The Seventh Circuit held that the exclusion applied to all volunteers and rejected insured’s argument that exclusion did not apply to injured individuals because there were no hired persons.at either fireworks event.