Cases / Insurance, liability and compensation funds · United States · 1961–2022
New York appeals court sides with AIG units in PFAS coverage dispute
Short record: the main facts, with sources. A full case file has not been prepared.
Nature's voice · report
No measurement of the harm done to me here is on record.
Did nature suffer? Not measured.
A New York appeals court ruled in January 2022 that pollution exclusions in policies issued by AIG companies barred any duty to defend Tonoga against claims over PFOA and PFOS discharges. The state had designated the Petersburg plant a state Superfund site after PFOA reached the municipal water supply.
What?
A New York appeals court held that pollution exclusions in AIG-company policies barred coverage for PFOA and PFOS discharges at Tonoga's Petersburg coating plant. New York Courts
Where?
Petersburg, New York, at a PTFE coating plant
When?
Plant operating since 1961; appeals court ruling on 6 January 2022 New York Courts
Who?
Gained
- New Hampshire Insurance Co. and Granite State (AIG companies) — Held to have no duty to defend Tonoga against the PFOA and PFOS claims New York Courts
Lost
- Tonoga Inc. — Insurance defence for the PFOA and PFOS claims New York Courts
Harmed
- Users of the municipal water supply — PFOA reached the supply; the state called the site a significant threat to public health
Why?
Not stated in the sources reviewed.
How?
The court characterised the discharges as knowing and part of routine manufacturing, the conduct to which the pollution exclusions were held to apply. Covington
6 of 6 questions answered from the record
What happened
The record, in order.
On 6 January 2022 the New York Appellate Division, Third Department, held that the total and qualified pollution exclusions in policies issued by New Hampshire Insurance Co. and Granite State, both AIG companies, barred any duty to defend.
The court described the claims as resting on Tonoga's knowing discharge of PFOA and PFOS as part of its routine manufacturing processes.
PFOA reached the municipal water supply, and the state environment agency designated the plant a state Superfund site and a significant threat to public health.
In court and with insurers
Every proceeding and every insurer decision on record.
Lawsuits and rulings
- 2022-01-06Defendant wonTonoga v. New Hampshire Ins. (N.Y. App. Div. 2022)New York Appellate Division, Third Department · Civil · Tonoga Inc. → New Hampshire Insurance Co. and Granite State
Held that the total and qualified pollution exclusions bar any duty to defend the policyholder; reported at 201 A.D.3d 1091. New York Courts
Insurers
No insurer decision on record.
What we don't know
Undisclosed, unproven, untried: recorded as data.
Nature
- Not measured Harm to nature: The record holds no measurement of harm to nature.
Record
- None on record The full text of the 2022 opinion was not reviewed; the holding is quoted secondhand.
- None on record The sources reviewed do not state the cost of the contamination or any payment under the policies.
Did the harm stop?
Not stated in the sources reviewed.
Who paid?
Not stated in the sources reviewed.
Sources
Voices on record: — Company or project— Government and regulators✓ Courts✓ Press and investigations— Communities and civil society— Researchers
Courts
- Tonoga v. New Hampshire Ins. (N.Y. App. Div. 2022), 201 A.D.3d 1091New York Courts · 2022-01-06
Press and investigations
- Covington publication on PFAS coverage litigation (May 2023)Covington · 2023-05
Connected cases
Related matters, and cases linked to this one through the same organisations, with the role each played in both.
- PFAS insurance disputes (3M, Chemours, DuPont) United States · 2020–2026
- AIG (Insurer) — here: insurer whose units New Hampshire Insurance Co. and Granite State were defendants; there: Insurer; plaintiff against 3M; defendant in Tonoga through two subsidiaries
- Tonoga Inc. (Company) — here: policyholder and plant operator; claimant in the coverage case; there: Policyholder; PFOA discharge, Petersburg, New York
- 3M booked US$10.3bn charge for US public water PFAS settlement United States · 2023–2036
- AIG (Insurer) — here: insurer whose units New Hampshire Insurance Co. and Granite State were defendants; there: insurer that sued 3M over coverage
- 3M PFOS: internal evidence, EPA penalty and Minnesota settlement United States · 1979–2026
- AIG (Insurer) — here: insurer whose units New Hampshire Insurance Co. and Granite State were defendants; there: Insurer suing 3M over coverage (October 2024)
- EACOP pipeline: insurers decline, construction continues Uganda / Tanzania · 2021–2026
- AIG (Insurer) — here: insurer whose units New Hampshire Insurance Co. and Granite State were defendants; there: Named as still willing to insure (2024, 2025)
- Exxon Valdez: the spill, insurance and court cases United States · 1989–2015
- AIG (Insurer) — here: insurer whose units New Hampshire Insurance Co. and Granite State were defendants; there: Participant in the excess programme
- Insurers of the Carmichael coal mine Australia · 2015–2025
- AIG (Insurer) — here: insurer whose units New Hampshire Insurance Co. and Granite State were defendants; there: Not ruled out; insured on-ground works until 30 September 2019
- Monsanto/Bayer PCB and Roundup insurance suit v AIG United States · 1967–2026
- AIG (Insurer) — here: insurer whose units New Hampshire Insurance Co. and Granite State were defendants; there: Insurer that declined cover; defendant
- PCB pollution and the Monsanto Anniston settlement United States · 2002–2025
- AIG (Insurer) — here: insurer whose units New Hampshire Insurance Co. and Granite State were defendants; there: Excess insurer; defendant in Bayer's suit over cover for PCB and Roundup settlements
- Roundup litigation, settlements and legal shield (Bayer/Monsanto) United States · 2009–2026
- AIG (Insurer) — here: insurer whose units New Hampshire Insurance Co. and Granite State were defendants; there: Insurer that refused cover