943 N.W.2d 772
N.D.2020Background:
- Explosion at a McKenzie County well site injured plaintiff Jesse Dellinger; multiple defendants sued including QEP (site operator) and Legendary (plaintiff’s employer).
- Legendary’s master services agreement required commercial liability insurance naming QEP as additional insured; Legendary’s insurer was Kinsale.
- QEP tendered defense to Legendary/Kinsale; Kinsale denied coverage and QEP sued for breach and declaratory relief seeking a declaration that Kinsale had a duty to defend QEP.
- District court granted partial summary judgment declaring Kinsale has a duty to defend, but left other claims and factual development unresolved.
- Kinsale appealed before the district court ruled on its Rule 54(b) certification motion; the district court later declined to certify the partial judgment as final.
- The Supreme Court held the Declaratory Judgment Act does not create an independent statutory basis for immediate appeal of the partial summary judgment and dismissed the appeal for lack of jurisdiction, adopting the reasoning of the Ziegler plurality.
Issues:
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the Declaratory Judgment Act makes an insurer’s duty-to-defend ruling immediately appealable | Kinsale: the Act (esp. §32‑23‑06 and §32‑23‑01) makes duty‑to‑defend declaratory judgments final and appealable | QEP: appeals must be grounded in statutory appealability; this partial order is nonfinal and Rule 54(b) is required | Court: No—Declaratory Judgment Act does not provide independent appellate jurisdiction; appeal dismissed |
| Whether the partial summary judgment was final or required Rule 54(b) certification | Kinsale: the declaration was final as to duty to defend | QEP: order was not intended to be final; further proceedings and discovery contemplated; Rule 54(b) required and was denied | Court: Adopted Ziegler plurality—order not intended to be final; Rule 54(b) not satisfied; no appealability |
Key Cases Cited
- Ziegler v. Meadowbrook Ins. Grp., Inc., 774 N.W.2d 782 (N.D. 2009) (split decision; plurality held insurer duty‑to‑defend declaratory rulings are not immediately appealable when nonfinal)
- Jordet v. Jordet, 861 N.W.2d 154 (N.D. 2015) (appealability is governed by statute; lack of statutory basis defeats jurisdiction)
- Mann v. N.D. Tax Comm’r, 692 N.W.2d 490 (N.D. 2005) (discusses interplay of statutory appealability and Rule 54(b))
- Bulman v. Hulstrand Constr. Co., 503 N.W.2d 240 (N.D. 1993) (orders not disposing of all claims are generally not appealable)
- Regstad v. Steffes, 433 N.W.2d 202 (N.D. 1988) (same principle against interlocutory appeals)
- Blackburn, Nickels & Smith, Inc. v. Nat’l Farmers Union Prop. & Cas. Co., 452 N.W.2d 319 (N.D. 1990) (context for legislative amendment to Declaratory Judgment Act regarding insurer duty to defend)