JonesActQuestions.com registered users will be transferred as well.
|
|
|
| Jones Act Federal Circuits' & State Decisions - 5th Circuit | |||||||||
| Tuesday, 01 December 2009 07:31 | |||||||||
|
Case Name: Bayou Steel Corporation v. Evanston Insurance Company Date Decided: November 10, 2009 Court: United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit Judge: Judge King, Judge Davis, Judge Benavides Citation: 2009 WL 3753538(C.A.5(La.) Background:
In 2002, Bayou Steel Corp engaged Memco Barge Lines under a contract of affreightment to transport steel bundles by barge from Bayou's facility. Bayou loaded the barge and hired Kindra Marine Terminals, a stevedoring company, to unload the barge upon arrival. While unloading the barge, Ryan Campbell, a Kinder employee, suffered substantial injuries. As a result, Campbell filed suit against Bayou in Illinois state court. Bayou's primary insurer accepted coverage and defense for Campbell's claims against Bayou. Bayou's primary insurer, excess wharfinger insurur, and excess insurers initially denied coverage. Bayou brought suit against all of their insurers who had denied coverage of Campbell's claim. The parties filed opposing Motions for Summary Judgment and presented coverage issues to the district court. The district court granted Evanston's (excess wharfinger insurer) Motion for Summary judgment holding that Campbell's claims against Bayou were pursuant to the LHWCA and thus, the policy provided no coverage. Issue: Held: This Court relied on another case in which an exclusion clause provided that claims would not be covered that resulted from, "any losses arising out of injuries covered under the LHWCA". However, this Court noted Evanston's exclusion clause provided exclusion for "claims made or suits brought pursuant to the LHWCA". Accordingly, this Court examined the nature of Campbell's claim against Bayou rather than looking at whether his injuries were covered under the LHWCA. This Court found that Campbell's claims are unaffected by LHWCA's exclusivity provision. And therefore, Campbell's claim cannot be characterized as a claim "pursuant to" the LHWCA exclusion. Accordingly this Court found that Evanston had to provide coverage consistent with their respective policies. Comment: Some insurance companies will not cover claims that may be brought under the LHWCA because of the possible amount plaintiffs might be able to recover under the Act. Here, because the claim was not one brought pursuant to, as drafted by the insurer, the insurance exclusion did not include the plaintiff's claim.
Only registered users can write comments!
Powered by !JoomlaComment 4.0alpha3
!joomlacomment 4.0 Copyright (C) 2009 Compojoom.com . All rights reserved."
|
Translate This Site