by KPMLAW | Nov 16, 2015 | KPMBlog, News, Uncategorized
Written by John K. Messersmith, Esq. & Sarah Kathryn Atkinson, Esq. Edited by Janeen Koch, Esq. How often have you had a claim where the facts suggested your insured had no liability but years after the accident, the claim re-emerges on your desk as a lawsuit with your insured as a defendant? As a claims professional, a huge concern in any case involving multiple entities and parties is keeping your coverage from being exposed. Transportation cases are particularly problematic as the industry is known for its complicated relationships associated with owner/operators, leased tractors, leased trailers and other contractual arrangements. Plaintiffs’ attorneys mine those relationships for ways to include new parties and importantly, to find additional layers of coverage. One such tactic that seems to be gaining favor with plaintiff attorneys is to allege a “joint venture” between a tractor or trailer owner and the operator. Traditionally, plaintiffs simply alleged an employer-employee relationship and therefore, the employee’s negligence was vicariously imposed on the employer. Obviously, the existence of such a relationship in the trucking industry can be complicated and requires a fact-based determination of a number of factors, the most important of which is the right to control. Coker v. Gunter, 191 Va. 747 (1951). Today, however, most motor carriers and operators are engaged in a contractual relationship represented by a contract, lease or purchase agreement. This complex and often tangled set of relationships has given rise to some attorneys arguing that this type of relationship constitutes a joint venture. They simply allege that the owner and the operator engaged in a joint venture to transport product for a...
