OF LAW. A. The Ocean Marine Exclusion. Under the express terms of its provisions, the Guaranty Act is to be liberally construed “to avoid financial loss to claimants or policyholders because of the insolvency of an insurer ...” La.Rev.Stat.Ann. § 22:1376 (West 1993). See also Nasello v. Transit Casualty Co., 530 So.2d 1114, 1115 (La.1988). By its terms, however, the Guaranty Act excludes coverage for “ocean marine” insurance. La. Rev.Stat.Ann. § 22:1377. Unfortunately, the statute does so without defining the term “ocean marine” and courts reached disparate results on the issue of whether workers’ compensation and employer’s liability policies with maritime endorsements qualify for the “ocean marine” exclusion. See, e.g., Coe v. L & L Sandblasting, Inc., 707 F.Supp. 874 (W.D.La.1988) (<HOLDING>); Green v. SHRM Catering, Inc., 710 F.Supp. 174
holding an endorsement to an existing insurance policy which added a new vehicle did not create a new contract of insurance but was merged with and became a part of the original policy holding that a standard wcel policy with a maritime endorsement is an ocean marine policy holding that a standard employers liability policy is not an ocean marine policy recognizing that endorsement would prevail if inconsistent with policy provisions holding it is settled that in construing an endorsement to an insurance policy the endorsement and the policy must be read together and the words of the policy remain in full force and effect except as altered by the words of the endorsement