A construction contractor and its insurer allege two carriers have spent more than three years refusing to cover a workplace injury claim.
New York Marine and General Insurance Company and MDG Design & Construction LLC filed suit against Kinsale Insurance Company and Mt. Hawley Insurance Company on July 13, 2026, in New York state court. Kinsale removed the case to the US District Court for the Southern District of New York on September 23, 2026.
The dispute traces back to a construction project at 640 Riverside Drive in Manhattan. According to the complaint, MDG retained Chanel Construction, Corp. through a written contract to provide certain services on the project. On January 20, 2022, a worker was injured while climbing down a ladder at the site.
The worker sued MDG in a separate personal injury action filed in Queens County Supreme Court in March 2022. That lawsuit is still pending.
According to the complaint, the worker testified at a deposition in January 2025 that his accident happened because clips on the ladder were bent, rusty and broken, causing the ladder to shift and the worker to fall. The ladder, the filing states, belonged to Chanel and was Chanel's responsibility to maintain.
The coverage chain starts with the contract. According to the complaint, Chanel agreed in writing to defend and indemnify MDG for any claims arising from Chanel's project work. That contract also required Chanel to obtain insurance naming MDG as an additional insured - meaning MDG would be covered under Chanel's policies as if it were a named policyholder - with at least $1 million per occurrence in primary coverage plus excess or umbrella coverage above that.
The complaint alleges Kinsale issued Chanel a primary commercial general liability policy covering December 27, 2021 to December 27, 2022, with limits of $1 million per occurrence and $2 million in the aggregate for personal injury claims. Mt. Hawley allegedly issued Chanel an excess or umbrella policy for the same period with a personal injury limit of at least $5 million.
The plaintiffs allege both policies should cover MDG as an additional insured, and that coverage should kick in first, ahead of MDG's own insurance through New York Marine - what the industry calls primary and noncontributory coverage.
Here is where the case gets pointed. The complaint alleges the plaintiffs first demanded in writing that Kinsale defend and indemnify MDG - and that Mt. Hawley indemnify MDG - no later than February 2023. The filing states they followed up repeatedly. Both carriers, the complaint alleges, refused.
MDG brought Chanel into the underlying injury lawsuit as a third party in May 2023, alleging Chanel was negligent and caused the accident. But the coverage demand against Kinsale and Mt. Hawley went unmet, according to the complaint.
The lawsuit asks for two things. First, a court order confirming that Kinsale must defend and indemnify MDG on a primary and noncontributory basis and reimburse the plaintiffs for all legal fees and costs from both the injury lawsuit and this coverage fight. It also seeks an order that Mt. Hawley must indemnify MDG on the same basis once Kinsale's primary policy limits are used up.
Second, the plaintiffs allege both carriers broke the terms of their own policies and violated New York insurance law by refusing coverage. They want damages for that breach.
For claims teams and coverage counsel handling construction-site injuries, this case is a reminder that an additional-insured demand left unanswered for three years does not quietly expire - it becomes a lawsuit with compounding defense costs attached.
The allegations in the complaint have not been tested, and no court has made any findings on the merits of the claims.
