A manufacturer of high pressure steam cleaning machines carried products-completed operations insurance under its general liability policy which provided, in pertinent part, that the stated aggregate limit was the limit of the insurer's obligation for "...all bodily injury and property damage included within the completed operations hazard and all bodily injury and property damage included within the products hazard...." The specified aggregate limit was $500,000.

The record showed that the insurer paid $400,000 for a death that resulted from use of its product. During the same policy year, a second death occurred while the victim was using another one of the insured's machines. In the second case, the insurer paid $100,000 on a judgment of $400,000 against its insured and filed a declaratory judgment action "to establish the extent of its liability under its policy...."

The insurer argued that it satisfied its obligation to the insured by paying a total of $500,000 for the two occurrences. The trial court held the insurer liable for an additional $300,000, the balance of the judgment against the insured, having determined that the aggregate limit applied separately to the two deaths because "....each occurrence met the definition of 'completed operations' and 'products hazard' under the policy and such aggregate limits were to be applied separately to these coverages...."

Alternatively, it said that the pertinent language was ambiguous. The insurer appealed. The appeal court said that the completed operations hazard and the products hazard were within the same class and that the aggregate limit did not apply separately to such injuries.

The judgment of the trial court was reversed in favor of the insurer and against the insured.

(DIAMOND STATE INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellant v. HOMESTEAD INDUSTRIES, INCORPORATED ET AL., Respondents. Supreme Court of South Carolina. No. 24223. April 3, 1995. CCH 1995 Fire and Casualty Cases, Paragraph 5249.)