City of Los Angeles v. Allianz Insurance

Good Law
125 Cal. App. 4th 287·2004 Cal. App. LEXIS 2218·2004 Daily Journal DAR 15290·22 Cal. Rptr. 3d 716·2004 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 11367
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaDecember 27, 2004B167676California3,969 words

Opinion

Opinion

Boland, J.

SUMMARY

This case presents the question whether a shipper, who directs the loading of a truck on its premises and is to that extent a “user” of the truck, is also a “borrower” of the truck, and therefore an “insured” under the provisions of the trucking company’s insurance policy. We conclude the shipper did not exercise the requisite dominion and control over the truck to qualify as a borrower under the terms of the policy.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

This lawsuit has its origin in an accident that occurred on the premises of the City of Los Angeles (City). Truck driver Brian Haygood, who was employed by MSM Trucking, was injured when he fell off an I-beam during the weighing of his truck after it had been loaded with biosolids (treated sewage) at the City’s Terminal Island treatment facility. After Haygood sued the City, the City sought a defense and indemnity from MSM Trucking’s insurers, Allianz Insurance Company, Fireman’s Fund Insurance Company and National Surety Corporation. The insurers refused to defend the City, taking the position that the motor vehicle liability policy issued to MSM Trucking did not provide coverage to the City for the injury Haygood…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.