Travelers Indem. Co. of Ill. v. Royal Oak Enters.
Decision Date | 13 October 2004 |
Docket Number | No. 5:02-cv-58-Oc-10GRJ.,5:02-cv-58-Oc-10GRJ. |
Parties | TRAVELERS INDEMNITY COMPANY OF ILLINOIS, Plaintiff, v. ROYAL OAK ENTERPRISES, INC., a foreign corporation; Dan Swearingen, an individual; and John V. Tilton, Sr., as Personal Representative of the Estate of John V. Tilton Jr., deceased, Defendants. |
Court | U.S. District Court — Middle District of Florida |
Andrew Edward Grigsby, and Sina Bahadoran, Hinshaw & Culbertson, Miami, FL, for Plaintiff.
Daniel James King, Barry Goheen, King & Spalding, Atlanta, GA, Jona J. Miller, King & Spalding, Sarasota, FL, William Harper Phelan, Jr., Bond, Arnett, Phelan, Smith & Craggs, P.A., Ocala, FL, for Defendants.
This insurance coverage dispute is before the Court for consideration of the Parties' cross-motions for summary judgment (Docs. 161 & 170).1 The Plaintiff, Travelers Indemnity Company of Illinois ("Travelers"), seeks a declaration that a wrongful death action against its insured, Royal Oak Enterprises, Inc. ("Royal Oak"), presented no covered claims, and further seeks recoupment from Royal Oak of the $750,000.00 it paid to settle the litigation. Royal Oak counterclaims, seeking a declaration that coverage was provided under the policy of insurance and demanding reimbursement of the reasonable fees and costs of counsel it independently retained to assist in the defense of the wrongful death action. For the reasons that follow, summary judgment is due to be granted in favor of both Parties, in part, disposing of some issues and narrowing the remaining issues to be tried.
This action arises out of a tragic incident that occurred in Ocala, Florida in 1998 at a processing plant owned and operated by Defendant Royal Oak, a manufacturer of charcoal briquettes. At that time, decedent John V. Tilton, Jr. was employed by Royal Oak as a furnace helper in its Ocala facility. As a furnace helper, Mr. Tilton's duties included working in and near the electrical panel of the facility's hammer mill, a machine that grinds charred wood into dust for the manufacture of charcoal briquettes. On August 30, 1998, Mr. Tilton inadvertently came into contact with the electrical panel of the hammer mill, which resulted in his electrocution and his death.
At the time of the incident causing Mr. Tilton's death, Royal Oak was insured by Travelers under a "Workers Compensation and Employers Liability" policy.2 The Employers Liability Insurance portion of that policy, which is the only part at issue here, covers damages that Royal Oak must pay because of bodily injury (including death) to an employee by accident arising out of and in the course of the employee's employment. The insurance does not cover "bodily injury intentionally caused or aggravated" by the insured. The pertinent provisions of the policy read as follows:
A. How This Insurance Applies
This employers liability insurance applies to bodily injury by accident or bodily Injury by disease. Bodily injury includes resulting death.
1. The bodily injury must arise out of and in the course of the injured employee's employment by you.
. . .
B. We Will Pay
We will pay all sums you legally must pay as damages because of bodily injury to your employees, provided the bodily injury is covered by this Employers Liability Insurance.
. . .
C. Exclusions
This insurance does not cover:
5. bodily injury intentionally caused or aggravated by you;
. . .
D. We Will Defend
We have the right and duty to defend, at our expense, any claim, proceeding or suit against you for damages payable by this insurance. We have the right to investigate and settle these claims, proceedings and suits.
We have no duty to defend a claim, proceeding or suit that is not covered by this insurance. We have no duty to defend or continue defending after we have paid our applicable limit of liability under this insurance.3
In July 2000, the personal representative of Mr. Tilton's estate brought a wrongful death action in Circuit Court In Marion County, Florida against Royal Oak.4 The wrongful death complaint was initially framed in one count, which alleged that Mr. Tilton's death was the result of Royal Oak's negligent conduct. Upon notification by Royal Oak, Travelers undertook the defense of the action and appointed Mr. Wayne Argo, Esq. of the law firm of Weiner & Argo, P.A. as counsel for Royal Oak. Royal Oak believed Weiner & Argo, a two-attorney firm, was too small to handle the case and voiced some objection, but acquiesced in the representation.
In November of 2000, Mr. Argo received a proposal from the Tilton estate, offering to settle the case for $750,000.00, an amount within the limits of coverage under the Travelers policies. Mr. Argo communicated the settlement proposal to Paul McAllister, the newly appointed Vice President of Royal Oak's Ocala facility where the death occurred. In February of 2001, only days before the settlement offer was due to expire, the Tilton estate notified Mr. Argo of its Intent to move for leave to amend its complaint to add a prayer for punitive damages. Mr. Argo did not communicate this information to Royal Oak, but instead informed the Travelers' claims administrator that the motion, if filed, would likely be granted. Shortly thereafter, Travelers permitted the first settlement offer to lapse.
The Tilton estate eventually filed its motion to amend the complaint in June of 2001.5 Attached to the motion was a proposed amended complaint containing, in addition to the original negligence count, a prayer for punitive damages and a second count framed as an intentional tort.6 The intentional tort claim was based on allegations that the defendants' conduct was "objectively substantially certain to cause injury or death."7
Under Florida law, which supplies the substantive law of this diversity case,8 negligence actions brought by an employee (or his estate) against an employer for injuries sustained during the course of employment are barred by workers' compensation immunity.9 However, intentional torts, including allegations that the employer engaged in conduct "substantially certain to result in injury or death," do not fall within workers' compensation immunity.10
Upon examining the proposed amended complaint, Travelers concluded that the allegations in the intentional tort count fell outside of the coverage provided by its policies. On August 6, 2001, Travelers sent Royal Oak a "Reservation of Rights Letter" stating that it would continue to defend the action under a reservation of its right to contest coverage.11 The letter also set forth the grounds on which Travelers based its conclusion, specifically that the Employers Liability Insurance policy covers only accidents and excludes "bodily injury intentionally caused or aggravated" by the insured and that, further, punitive damages are not insurable as a matter of public policy. With respect to its continued representation in the matter, Travelers wrote:
12Royal Oak responded to the reservation of rights letter on August 17, 2001, stating:
Deposition testimony reveals that in response to Royal Oak's letter, Travelers suggested several other Florida law firms located in the surrounding Ocala area that could undertake the defense of the Tilton action instead of Atlanta-based, King & Spalding.14 Royal Oak rejected the alternative firms offered by Travelers.15 Though Royal Oak asserts that there never was a "meeting of the minds" on the issue of...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Babcock & Wilcox Co. v. Am. Nuclear Insurers
... ... clauses where the insured, acting in good faith, enters into a reasonable settlement at or below the policy limits ... v. St. PaulMercury Indem. Co., 62 Idaho 438, 112 P.2d 1011 (1941); Three Sons, ... See Travelers Indem. Co. v. Dingwell, 884 F.2d 629 (1st Cir.1989) (Maine ... See Nandorf, Inc., v. CNA Ins. Cos., 134 Ill.App.3d 134, 88 Ill.Dec. 968, 479 N.E.2d 988, 994 (1985) ... See, e.g., Travelers Indem. Co. of Ill. v. Royal Oak Enterps., Inc., 344 F.Supp.2d 1358, 1370 ... ...
-
Mid–continent Cas. Co. v. Basdeo
... ... Adolfo House Distributing Corp. v. Travelers Property and Casualty Ins. Co., 165 F.Supp.2d 1332, 1335 ... v. Travelers Indem. Co., 118 F.3d 1511, 1515 (11th Cir.1997); Bituminous ... Travelers Indem. Co. of Ill. v. Royal Oak Enters., Inc., 344 F.Supp.2d 1358, 1365 ... ...
-
Continental Cas. Co. v. City of Jacksonville
... ... Phila. Indem. Ins. Co. v. Kohne, 181 Fed.Appx. at 891; Ramos v. Nw ... Talat Enters. Inc. v. Aetna Cas. & Sur. Co., 952 F.Supp. 773 ... Travelers Indem. Co., 450 F.2d 542, 553 (5th Cir.1971); Farmers ... Hannig v. Hartford Accident & Indem. Co., 342 Ill.App. 539, 544-45, 97 N.E.2d 476, 478-79 (Ill.App.Ct.1951) ... Travelers Indem. Co. of Ill. v. Royal Oak Enter., Inc., 344 F.Supp.2d 1358, 1370 (M.D.Fla.2004) ... ...
-
SINNI v. Scottsdale Ins. Co.
... ... See Underwriters at Lloyds London v. STD Enters., Inc., 395 F.Supp.2d 1142 (M.D.Fla.2005) hereinafter " ... Co. v. Travelers Cas. & Sur. Co., 227 F.Supp.2d 1248, 1258 (M.D.Fla.2002) ... Travelers Indem. Co. of Ill. v. Royal Oak Enters., Inc., 344 F.Supp.2d ... ...
-
CHAPTER 6 Duty to Defend and Insured Litigation
...June 27, 2005) (applying Wisconsin law). Eleventh Circuit: Travelers Indemnity Company of Illinois v. Royal Oak Enterprises, Inc., 344 F. Supp.2d 1358, 1374 (M.D. Fla. 2004), aff’d 171 Fed. Appx. 831 (11th Cir. 2006) (predicting Florida law). State Courts: Alabama: L & S Roofing Supply Co. ......
-
Chapter 5
...June 27, 2005) (applying Wisconsin law). Eleventh Circuit: Travelers Indemnity Company of Illinois v. Royal Oak Enterprises, Inc., 344 F. Supp.2d 1358, 1374 (M.D. Fla. 2004), aff’d 171 Fed. Appx. 831 (11th Cir. 2006) (predicting Florida law). State Courts: Alabama: L & S Roofing Supply Co. ......
-
The dance of the Porcupines: defense under a reservation of rights in Florida.
...under a reservation of rights was extensively explored in Travelers Indemnity Company of Illinois v. Royal Oak Enterprises, Inc., 344 F. Supp. 2d 1358, 1371 (M.D. Fla. 2004) (where the author represented Travelers). One of the first propositions discussed was that the insured must actually ......