Northfield Insurance Company v. North Brook Industries, Inc.

── Northfield Insurance Company v. North Brook Industries, Inc. ── Court: Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit Date: May 22, 2026 Category: NEW USCA11 Case: 24-13333 Document: 49-1 Date Filed: 05/22/2026 Page: 1 of 13 FOR PUBLICATION In the United States Court of Appeals For the Eleventh Circuit ____________________ No. 24-13333 ____________________ NORTHFIELD INSURANCE COMPANY, Plaintiff-Appellant, versus NORTH BROOK INDUSTRIES, INC., d.b.a. United Inn and Suites, J.G., Defendants-Appellees. ____________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia D.C. Docket No. 1:23-cv-03596-SEG ____________________ Before WILLIAM PRYOR, Chief Judge, and ABUDU and TJOFLAT, Cir- cuit Judges. USCA11 Case: 24-13333 Document: 49-1 Date Filed: 05/22/2026 Page: 2 of 13 2 Opinion of the Court 24-13333 TJOFLAT, Circuit Judge: The instant appeal concerns a declaratory judgment action and an underlying tort suit. I. BACKGROUND North Brook Industries, Inc. (d/b/a United Inn & Suites) owns and operates a hotel in Decatur, Georgia. In December 2020, J.G. sued North Brook under a federal statute and Georgia com- mon law for injuries she sustained while being sex trafficked by third parties at the hotel between 2018 and 2019. 1 Northfield Insurance Company insures North Brook under a commercial insurance policy. Under Coverage A, Northfield must pay “those sums that [North Brook] becomes legally obli- gated to pay as damages” because of bodily injury and property damage to which the policy applies and must “defend [North Brook] against any ‘suit’ seeking those damages.” Under Coverage B, Northfield must pay “those sums that [North Brook] becomes legally obligated to pay as damages” because of personal and ad- vertising injury to which the policy applies and must “defend [North Brook] against any ‘suit’ seeking those damages.” Northfield’s duties under Coverages A and B are modified by two endorsements relevant to this case. Under the abuse or 1 Northfield provided North Brook with a defense in this action subject to a reservation of rights. On July 11, 2025, a jury returned a verdict in favor of J.G. In August of that year, North Brook filed a renewed motion for judgment as a matter of law, which is still pending before the District Court. USCA11 Case: 24-13333 Document: 49-1 Date Filed: 05/22/2026 Page: 3 of 13 24-13333 Opinion of the Court 3 molestation endorsement, Northfield owes no coverage for bodily injury, property damage, or personal and advertising injury “aris- ing out of any act of ‘abuse or molestation’ committed by any per- son, including any act or omission in connection with the preven- tion or suppression of such ‘abuse or molestation.’” Under the as- sault or battery endorsement, Northfield’s coverage duties for as- sault or battery offenses are limited to $25,000 for each individual offense and $50,000 for the aggregate of all offenses. This endorse- ment also excludes coverage for various injuries, including injuries “arising out of an ‘assault or battery offense’ com