An insurer wants out of a nearly $2.8 million barbecue sauce burn verdict, arguing its insured stayed silent until after trial.
Mt. Hawley Insurance Company filed suit on April 7 in the US District Court for the Southern District of New York against Bill Miller Bar-B-Q Enterprises, LLC, seeking a declaration that it owes no duty to defend or indemnify Bill Miller in connection with a personal injury lawsuit out of Texas that has already produced a sizable jury verdict.
The underlying case traces back to May 2023, when a customer named Genesis Monita visited the drive-thru at a Bill Miller restaurant in San Antonio. According to the filing, Monita dropped a hot container of bar-b-q sauce and suffered what was described as a second-degree burn. She filed a negligence lawsuit in Bexar County in October 2023, seeking more than $1,000,000 in damages. The case was later amended to include a claim for exemplary damages. In January 2025, a jury awarded Monita $925,925 in actual damages and $1,890,000 in punitive damages, plus prejudgment interest.
The coverage fight turns on a self-insured retention endorsement in the commercial general liability policy Mt. Hawley issued to Bill Miller. That endorsement set a $1,000,000 per-occurrence retention — meaning Bill Miller was responsible for handling and paying claims up to that amount. But it also required immediate written notice to Mt. Hawley for certain categories of claims, including any suit seeking at least 50% of the retention amount, any claim involving serious burns, and any suit involving punitive damages.
According to the filing, Bill Miller did not notify Mt. Hawley of the incident, the original lawsuit, or the amended petition until on or about January 21, 2025 - after the jury had already returned its verdict. That gap stretches more than a year from the date the original petition was filed, and well past the point at which multiple notice triggers under the policy had arguably been activated.
Mt. Hawley disclaimed coverage by letter on March 26, 2025. In its filing, the insurer contends that Bill Miller's failure to provide timely notice breached an express condition of coverage, and that it was prejudiced because it could no longer investigate or participate in defense strategy or settlement before liability was determined. Mt. Hawley also argues that the punitive damages award is not covered, as exemplary damages are not insurable as a matter of New York law - which governs the policy under a choice-of-law provision.
No court ruling has been issued, and Bill Miller has not yet presented its position.
For insurance professionals, the case is a sharp reminder that self-insured retention structures carry notice obligations that, if missed, can unravel the very coverage an insured is counting on.
The case is Mt. Hawley Insurance Company v. Bill Miller Bar-B-Q Enterprises, LLC, Case No. 1:26-cv-02826, US District Court for the Southern District of New York.
