Binder v. McGehee
| Decision Date | 15 December 1980 |
| Docket Number | No. 13809,13809 |
| Citation | 393 So.2d 334 |
| Parties | Charles BINDER v. Edgar D. McGEHEE et al. |
| Court | Court of Appeal of Louisiana — District of US |
Patrick J. Berrigan, Slidell, for defendant-appellee.
Richard M. Michalczyk, Metairie, for defendant-appellant.
Charles A. Binder, pro se.
Before ELLIS, COLE and WATKINS, JJ.
The issue in this case is whether the third party defendant insurance companies have a duty to defend their insureds or whether the language of the policy clearly excludes coverage of the claim. Because we find the trial court was clearly wrong in concluding the insurance companies owed a defense to the insureds, we reverse the judgment of the trial court. Arceneaux v. Domingue, 365 So.2d 1330 (La.1978), rehearing denied 1979.
This dispute arose when plaintiff, Charles Binder, a deputy sheriff for Tangipahoa Parish, sued Edgar McGehee, a deputy sheriff for St. Tammany Parish, George Broom, sheriff of St. Tammany Parish, and the St. Tammany Parish Sheriff's Office. Binder claimed his reputation had been damaged by slanderous remarks made by McGehee. Deputy McGehee allegedly made the following statement to a group of law enforcement officers attending a Regional Organized Crime Information Center meeting in Little Rock, Arkansas: "Don't trust Charles Binder, he's on the take."
The Sheriff's Association of the State of Louisiana provides insurance coverage for the sheriff and deputies of both parishes involved. Claims up to $15,000 are deductible, payable from the sheriff's general fund and joint checking account with the broker. Claims from $15,000 to $50,000 are payable from the policy provided by North River Insurance Company. The next three layers of insurance are provided by International Surplus Lines Insurance Company. Defendants were informed by their insurance agent, Gray and Company, that no defense would be provided because of certain exclusionary language in the base policy.
Defendants filed a third party claim against North River Insurance Company and International Surplus Lines Insurance Company, 1 seeking damages for the insurers' violation of their duty to defend. In the meantime, plaintiff Charles Binder dismissed his demand against the original defendants. The trial court denied the insurers' motion for summary judgment and granted partial summary judgment in favor of third party plaintiffs, declaring third party plaintiffs were covered by the insurance policy in question. 2 A hearing was held to determine the amount of legal fees incurred by the third party plaintiffs (the original defendants) in their defense of Binder's defamation suit. Judgment was rendered in this matter in the amount of $18,125.00. The insurance companies have appealed both the partial summary judgment and the money judgment which were rendered in favor of the third party plaintiffs.
The pertinent language of the base policy reads as follows:
"NAME OF INSURED (ASSURED):
The 'NAMED INSURED' shall be defined as follows:
'Named Insured' means each Sheriff of the Parishes of the State of Louisiana, each legally commissioned Deputy Sheriff, and each employee of the Sheriff.... Wherever the word 'Insured' appears herein, it will be understood to mean the Named Insured.
(a) To any obligation for which the insured or any carrier as his insurer may be held liable under any workmen's compensation, unemployment compensation, disability benefits law, or under any similar law, or to personal injury or bodily injury sustained by any paid full and part time law enforcement officer of the names (sic) insured directly or indirectly related to his employment by the named insured; (Emphasis added.)
Under the language of the policy, plaintiff Deputy Sheriff Charles Binder is clearly an insured. The defendants Deputy Sheriff Edgar McGehee and Sheriff George Broom, are also insureds under the policy. Under...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Baron Oil Co. v. Nationwide Mut. Fire Ins. Co., AR-437
...this case within the terms of the policy exclusion. Butler v. Michigan Mutual Insurance Co., 402 So.2d 949 (Ala.1981); Binder v. McGehee, 393 So.2d 334 (La.App.1981), cert. denied, 397 So.2d 1359 (La.1981). We conclude, therefore, that under the true facts revealed by the amended complaint ......
-
Fruge v. First Continental Life and Acc. Ins. Co.
...upon their obligations under the policy. Oceanonics, Inc. v. Petroleum Distributing Co., 292 So.2d 190 (La.1974); Binder v. McGehee, 393 So.2d 334 (La.App. 1st Cir.1980); writ ref., La., 397 So.2d 1359; Hall, supra; Cormack v. Prudential Ins. Co. of America, 259 So.2d 340 (La.App. 4th Cir.1......
-
Binder v. McGehee, 81-C-0504
...Parish Sheriff's Office, applying for certiorari, or writ of review, to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit. Parish of St. Tammany. 393 So.2d 334. ...