Who’s on First? By Reading the Full Policy 7th Circuit Refuses to Accept Meaning Different than the Wording of the Policy

Read the full article at https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/owner-vehicle-determines-who-defends-tort-action-zalma-esq-cfe and at https://zalma.com/blog plus more than 3800 posts. 

In the aftermath of a serious collision between an ambulance and a semi-truck, a question lingered: Who owned the ambulance?  In Continental Western Insurance Company v. Country Mutual Insurance Company, No. 20-2962, United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit (June 24, 2021) the Seventh Circuit determined who was on first.

ZALMA OPINION

It makes no sense for an insurer, who specifically identified by VIN number the ambulance involved in the accident including an “other insurance” clause that establishes it as a “primary” policy to claim they owed nothing to defend or indemnify its insured. The arguments made by Country Mutual were interesting but not convincing since it ignored the clear and unambiguous nature of its own policy and tried to argue it did not mean what it wrote. The Seventh Circuit slapped down the argument and agreed with the District Court that it should apply the contracts as written, always.