CGL POLICY DOESN'T COVER EMPLOYEE'S INJURIES

270_C298

CGL POLICY DOESN'T COVER EMPLOYEE'S INJURIES

Commercial General Liability

Employee Exclusion

Expected Or Intended Exclusion

 

 

Midwestern Indemnity Company (Midwestern) had issued a commercial general liability policy, which included workers compensation coverage, to Paul Savage. While working as an employee of Savage, David Rich was seriously and permanently injured. He received workers compensation benefits but then filed an action for damages, alleging that his employer knew, or should have known, that the job assigned to him would place him in a hazardous situation that probably would result in serious injuries. Savage referred the action to Midwestern, which denied liability and refused to defend. (A consent judgment of $1.3 million was entered in favor of Rich against Savage.) Midwestern then filed this action for declaratory judgment.

 

The policy excluded coverage of claims for bodily injury "expected or intended from the standpoint of the insured," and "bodily injury to an employee arising out of or in the course of (a) employment by the insured, or (b) performing duties relating to the conduct of the insured's business."

 

The trial court granted Midwestern's motion for summary judgment and Rich appealed.

 

The higher court pointed out that Rich was injured while working for Savage and was performing duties assigned to him by the insured. The policy issued to the insured excluded injuries such as those Rich sustained.

 

The judgment entered in the trial court holding that the policy did not cover the injuries sustained by the employee was affirmed.

 

Midwestern Indemnity Company v. David Rich and Paul Savage, Appellant-No. 02CA1584-Court of Appeals of Ohio, Second District, Darke County-October 18, 2002-778 North Eastern Reporter 2d 141