545 F. App'x 851
11th Cir.2013Background
- Epoch was general contractor on Portofino at Lakes Laguna, Florida; Orange & Blue Construction subcontracted to CL & B Contracting, which subcontracted to Sandi Construction; Jose Tejeda, a laborer for Sandi, died at the site; Estate filed wrongful death action with two claims against Epoch; CGL policy with Amerisure named Epoch as additional insured; policy exclusions (Workers’ Compensation, Employer’s Liability) bar coverage for Epoch’s employees or those employed by Epoch’s subcontractors; Amerisure and Epoch cross-moved for summary judgment in federal court; court held Employer’s Liability Exclusion bars coverage and declined to decide Workers’ Compensation Exclusion; Tejeda is treated as Epoch’s statutory employee under Florida law and policy interpretation; insured contract exception does not apply because Estate’s claims arise from Epoch’s own acts, not a contract assumption of tort liability; district court’s summary judgment in Amerisure’s favor affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does Employer’s Liability Exclusion bar coverage for injuries to Epoch’s employees or statutory employees? | Amerisure argues exclusion bars any employee-injury claims. | Epoch contends statutory employee should not be covered. | Yes, exclusion bars coverage. |
| Does the policy’s insured contract exception apply to the Estate’s tort claims against Epoch? | Estate argues exception should apply as it involves contractual assumptions. | Epoch contends exception requires assumption of tort liability by Epoch under contract. | No, exception does not apply. |
| Is Tejeda a covered claimant under general liability for purposes of exclusion? | Estate seeks coverage for Tejeda’s death. | Tejeda is Epoch’s statutory employee, not a third-party public-injury claimant. | Tejeda qualifies as a statutory employee; no duty to defend or indemnify. |
Key Cases Cited
- Navarro Sav. Ass’n v. Lee, 446 U.S. 458 (1980) (nominal parties; diversity jurisdiction focuses on real parties)
- Revoredo v. Fla. Cmty. Coll. Dist., 698 So. 2d 890 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997) (statutory employees treated as employees for workers’ comp and insurance exclusions)
- Dodge v. Fidelity & Cas. Co. of N.Y., 424 So. 2d 39 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982) (policy analyzes include statutory employees as employees)
- Terrell v. USAir, 132 F.3d 621 (11th Cir. 1998) (issues raised for first time on appeal not considered)
- Digital Equip. Corp. v. Desktop Direct, Inc., 511 U.S. 863 (1994) (final judgment concept for appeal under 28 U.S.C. § 1291)