Skip to main content

Are you a legal professional? Visit our professional site

Please enter a legal issue and/or a location
Begin typing to search, use arrow keys to navigate, use enter to select

Am. States Ins. Co. v. Progressive Cas. Ins. Co., No. C058641

By FindLaw Staff on December 15, 2009 9:53 AM

In plaintiff's action against defendant-insurer seeking a defense on behalf of its insureds in the underlying accident between a trucker and a pedestrian at a construction site, summary judgment and a stipulated judgment that concluded, as a matter of law, that the trucker's insurers did not owe a duty to defend the developer/general contractor/grading contractor under any vicarious liability theory is reversed where: 1) an omnibus clause may make a person or entity that is potentially liable under the peculiar risk doctrine an "uninsured," and thereby entitled to a defense pursuant to the insurance policy; and 2) under the peculiar risk doctrine, one may be held vicariously liable if he hires an independent contractor to do work that is likely to create a peculiar risk of harm to others unless special precautions are taken. 

Read Am. States Ins. Co. v. Progressive Cas. Ins. Co., No. C058641 [HTML]

Read Am. States Ins. Co. v. Progressive Cas. Ins. Co., No. C058641 [PDF]

Appellate Information

Filed December 14, 2009

Judges

Opinion by Judge Butz

Counsel
For Appellant:   Law Offices of William J. Diffenderfer and Lisa A. Pan; Lombardi, Loper & Conant, Ralph A. Lombardi and Lori A. Sebransky

For Appellee:  Coddington, Hicks & Danforth, Randolph S. Hicks and Andrew P. Collier, McNulty & Saacke and Charles F. Saacke

Copied to clipboard

Find a Lawyer

More Options