Listen to this articleDefendants appealed the grant of summary judgment for plaintiff. KAT Excavation Company was a general contractor on an airport construction project. KAT’s vehicles could not transport the required quantity of rock from the supplier to the airport, so KAT engaged other hauling companies, including defendants. While traveling between the supplier and the airport, one of defendants’ drivers was in an accident with another motorist. The motorist sued the truck driver. Plaintiff, KAT’s insurer, filed a declaratory judgment action to deny coverage for the crash. The trial court granted summary judgment for plaintiff, finding that the term “hire” in the insurance policy required KAT to exercise some control over the dump truck and that the evidence did not show it exercised such control.
Where the policy language unambiguously required an element of control, the district court did not err in granting plaintiff summary judgment where KAT exercised no control over the truck but instead simply hired defendants to perform a service.
Colloton, J., concurring: “I concur in the judgment based on the court’s conclusion that truck driver Hamlin received “permission” to drive the dump truck at issue from Tanner White of Chris White Construction, not from KAT Excavation, Inc.”
Judgment is affirmed.
BITCO General Insurance Company v. Smith (MLW No. 80940/Case No. 23-1043 – 8 pages) (U.S. Court of Appeals, 8th Circuit, Grasz, J.) Appealed from U.S. District Court, Western District of Missouri, Phillips, J. (Kaci R. Peterson, of Jefferson City, MO for appellants; Donald L. O’Keefe, of St. Louis, MO; Andrew J. Gelbach, of Warrensburg, MO; and James Daniel Ribaudo, of St. Louis, MO on the brief) (Martin John Buckley, of St. Louis, MO for appellee; Adrian Phillip Sulser, of St. Louis, MO on the brief)
