 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Indiana Insurance Company v. Brown12/24/2003
REVERSING AND REMANDING
Indiana Insurance Company appeals from a summary judgment in a declaratory judgment action finding that it is obligated to defend and indemnify its named and additional insureds under a commercial automobile liability policy issued to Shelby and Finch Garden, LLC, d/b/a Willowbank Garden Company (Willowbank). Indiana Insurance Company argues that the policy clearly excludes coverage of injuries to Willowbank's employees, and hence it has no duty to defend or indemnify Willowbank or its additional insured against a claim brought by the estates of two employees who were killed during the course of their employment. Because we agree that the individuals involved in the accident were clearly employees within the plain meaning of the policy, we reverse and remand for entry of a summary judgment order in favor of Indiana Insurance.
Matt Zehnder is a principal of Willowbank, which provides gardening and landscaping services to the public. Darren Akers, Jose Garcia, and Chase O'Banion were employees of Willowbank. On June 19, 2001, Akers was driving a pickup truck owned by Zehnder, and Garcia and O'Banion were passengers in the truck. As the truck proceeded across a railroad track, it was struck by a train, and Garcia and O'Banion were killed. Subsequently, Garcia's estate and Garcia's family filed a wrongful-death action against Zehnder, Willowbank, Akers, and CSX Transportation, the owner of the railroad crossing where the accident occurred.
At the time of the accident, Willowbank did not have workers' compensation coverage for its employees. However, Willowbank had obtained a business automobile liability insurance policy through Indiana Insurance Company covering the pickup truck. In response to the complaint by Garcia's estate, Indiana Insurance filed an intervening complaint and a petition for declaration of rights. Indiana Insurance also named O'Banion's estate as a third-party defendant.
Indiana Insurance argued that its policy specifically excluded coverage of employees, and that Willowbank's failure to obtain workers' compensation coverage did not extend the scope of its coverage. Following cross-motions for summary judgment, the trial court found, in an order entered on October 22, 2002, that the policy did provide coverage in this situation, and that Indiana Insurance is obligated to defend and indemnify its named and additional insureds under the policy. By an order entered on December 13, 2002, the trial court made its summary judgment order final and appealable.
The trial court did not set out its reasons for finding coverage under the policy. However, the central issue in this case is undisputed: Does the policy exclude coverage for employees such as Akers, Garcia, and O'Banion? We begin our analysis with Section III, Paragraphs B3, B4, and B5 of the policy, which provide in relevant part:
This insurance does not apply to any of the following:
3. Workers' Compensation
Any obligation for which the "insured" or the "insured's" insurer may be held liable under any workers' compensation , disability benefits, or unemployment compensation law or any similar law.
4. Employee Indemnification and Employer's Liability "Bodily injury" to:
a. An "employee" of the "insured" arising out of and in the course of:
(1) Employment by the "insured"; or
(2) Performing the duties related to the conduct of the "insured's" business; . . .
5. Fellow Employee
"Bodily injury" to any fellow "employee" of the "insured" arising out of and in the course of the fellow "employee's" employment or while performing d
Page 1 2 3 4 5 Kentucky Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|