Alabama Enforces "Ambiguous" Pollution Exclusion
I just read an interesting pollution exclusion decision from the Supreme Court of Alabama. State Auto Property & Casualty Insurance Co. v. Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality, 370 Ark. 251; 258 S.W.3d 736; 2007 Ark. Lexis 378 (Ark. 2007). While the court declined to overrule past decisions finding the definition of "pollutant" ambiguous in the context of pollution exclusions, the court accepted extrinsic evidence to cure the ambiguity and hold that gasoline is a "pollutant." I note this case because it is so unusual to see a court maintaining the view that a provision is ambiguous, yet curing the ambiguity and finding for the insurer. Undoubtedly, the court was reluctant to overrule its earlier decision, but the court was looking to move away from that decision.
