American States Ins. Co. v. Progressive Casualty Ins. Co

In American States Ins. Co. v. Progressive Casualty Ins. Co. (2009) 180 Cal.App.4th 18, a self-employed trucker was driving a tractor-trailer into the only entrance to a construction site when the rear portion of his trailer ran over the plaintiff, severely injuring both of his legs. The plaintiff sued the trucker, the owner of the trailer, the grading contractor on the construction project, the general contractor, and the developer. The defendants tendered the suit to various insurance companies; one such insurer sought summary judgment, asserting that it owed the defendants no duty to defend because, among other things, the defendants were not potentially vicariously liable for the trucker's negligence under the doctrine of peculiar risk. (Id. at pp. 23-24.) The trial court granted the motion, concluding that as a matter of law the peculiar risk doctrine did not apply, and the Court of Appeal reversed. (Id. at p. 25.) It explained that unlike the accident in Teichert & Son, Inc. v. Superior Court (1986) where a bicyclist riding along the shoulder of a road "simply collided with a dump truck turning left," in the present case there was evidence "that Meza/Western's trailer (bottom-dump dirt hauler) collided with the plaintiff while accessing the Vinci parties' Project entrance, a lone entrance which required Meza/Western 'to execute a U-turn (driving westbound in eastbound lanes), encroach on at least two pedestrian cross walks , jump a curb, and drive across a sidewalk ... , all without assistance of ... flagmen.' " (Id. at p. 31.) Thus, the court concluded, "Teichert is not the exemplar in this regard. Castro is." (Ibid.)