The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.

This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

P takes customers on ecological tours, during which they receive lectures on Hawaiian culture and participate in outdoor activities including hiking, snorkeling, and boogie boarding. A customer wandered off a hiking trail and fell 25 feet, breaking his pelvis. The insurance carrier settled out of court. After this incident, P expressed an interest in full liability coverage. P submitted an insurance application on May 25, 2004. On May 26, 2004, D, through Golden Bear Management Corporation, provided an insurance quotation. P agreed to the terms of coverage in the quotation and deposited $25,000 for the premium. D issued a binder outlining the terms of coverage the next day, which P accepted; D issued the insurance policy on July 19, 2004. The general liability insurance policy provided: We will pay those sums that the insured becomes legally obligated to pay as damages because of 'bodily injury' or 'property damage' to which this insurance applies. We will have the right and duty to defend the insured against any 'suit' seeking those damages. However, we will have no duty to defend the insured against any 'suit' seeking damages for 'bodily injury' or 'property damage' to which this insurance does not apply. The Policy covered from May 27, 2004, to May 27, 2005, and insured P for up to $ 1,000,000 per occurrence. On May 8, 2006, Carolyn Townes brought suit against P, among others, for the wrongful death of her husband. Lee Townes drowned while participating in a snorkeling trip that 'was offered, recommended, advertised, maintained, arranged, controlled, operated, sold, managed, and supervised' by Ps. She alleges that the drowning was caused by Ps' negligence and/or gross negligence, and was in violation of the duty of reasonable care owed by those providing recreational activities to the public. The complaint provides no detail on the nature of the alleged negligence. P tendered the suit to D for a defense and indemnification. D declined to provide a defense and has denied coverage. D points to the exclusion for Designated Work (Designated Work Exclusion). The insurance policy does not apply to 'bodily injury . . . arising out of 'your work' shown in the schedule.' The schedule describes 'your work' as 'Waterfall Hiking, Snorkeling, Boogie Boarding & Surfing.' The Definitions section of the Policy defines P's work in more detail: a. Work or operations performed by you or on your behalf; and b. Materials, parts, or equipment furnished in connection with such work or operations. 'Your work' includes: a. Warranties or representations made at any time with respect to the fitness, quality, durability, performance, or use of 'your work'; and b. The providing of or failure to provide warnings or instructions. The Townes suit alleges bodily injury sustained while snorkeling, which is described as part of P's 'work.' Therefore, there is no coverage. The 'Athletic or Sports Participants' (Athletic Exclusion) exclusion also includes a schedule that describes P's operations as 'Waterfall Hiking, Snorkeling, Boogie Boarding & Surfing.' The Policy then states, 'With respect to any operations shown in the Schedule, this insurance does not apply to 'bodily injury' to any person while practicing for or participating in any sports or athletic contest or exhibition that you sponsor.' D contends that injuries sustained by customers while snorkeling are not covered. D moved for summary judgment.

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

The applicable rule of law for this case will be displayed here.

Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.