Skip to main content

Are you a legal professional? Visit our professional site

Guided Legal Forms & Services: Sign In

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

Find a Lawyer

More Options

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


Opinion by Judge Butz

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

You Don’t Have To Solve This on Your Own – Get a Lawyer’s Help

Meeting with a lawyer can help you understand your options and how to best protect your rights. Visit our attorney directory to find a lawyer near you who can help.

Or contact an attorney near you:
Copied to clipboard