INSURANCE LAW: Connecticut Appellate Court affirms that anti-subrogation rule did not apply to bar a claim against tenant who caused property damage

The lease in the case provided in relevant part that the tenants agreed to use all electric, cooling and other systems in the dwelling in a prudent manner, and that the tenant would hold the lessor harmless “from any loss or claim arising out of or in connection with your use and occupancy”.

It was alleged that the tenants negligently caused property damage by leaving the property vacant during the winter without enough oil, causing a radiator to burst, resulting in extensive water damage.  In the lessor’s subrogation action against the tenant, a judgment entered in the amount of $61,302.00.

On the tenant’s appeal, the Appellate Court affirms, holding that the anti-subrogation rule does not to apply the insurer’s claim for equitable subrogation.  The Appellate Court concludes that the lease provided the tenants with adequate warning that they could be legally responsible for property damage. 

Amica Mutual Ins. Co. v. Muldowney, AC 37721 (July 12, 2016)