An insured paving and excavating contractor carried a commercial package policy with a commercial property coverage form on building and business personal property plus scheduled equipment under a commercial inland marine coverage form. The commercial property policy was blanket, and the valuation selected was replacement cost. The inland marine was on an actual cash value basis.

A fire destroyed one of the buildings covered by the blanket commercial property policy. At the time of the fire, the scheduled equipment was located in the building that burned and was a total loss. The insurer provided the insured with payment for the destroyed building and its business personal property on the blanket, replacement cost basis but actual cash value of the scheduled equipment, as per the contract. The total actual cash value limit on the equipment was $75,000. The insured submitted a claim for the equipment under the blanket building and contents in the amount of $425,000 replacement cost. The insurer denied coverage on that basis.

Although the blanket limit was sufficient to cover the loss of the destroyed building and business personal property as well as the scheduled property, a review of the statement of values submitted at the time coverage was secured indicated only $15,000 of business personal property located in the damaged building. Further, the wording in the contract for building and business personal property coverage states that there is no coverage for "property that is covered under another coverage form of this or any other policy in which it is more specifically described . . . "

The district court of Maryland denied the motion for coverage for the scheduled equipment under the blanket commercial property coverage on a replacement cost basis.

The decision discussed in this case was on one of two points brought in the same action. The other point involved coverage for business income on a building not scheduled under the policy for such coverage and is discussed in the case titled: Business Income Held Not Applicable To Building Not Scheduled For Such Coverage.

(Monumental Paving & Excavating, Inc., Plaintiff v. Pennsylvania Manufacturers' Association Insurance Company, Defendant. DMd. No. AMD 96-1722, November 27, 1996. CCH 1997 Fire and Casualty Cases, Paragraph 6146.)