Grain Dealers Mutual Insurance Company v. Sharbono, 2:12-cv-02607

On Nov. 5, 2009 a Ford pickup and an eastbound Volvo tractor-trailer collided head-on near Yuma, AZ; all occupants of the pickup died. The pickup allegedly suffered a Michelin tire failure; the tire was allegedly purchased from Hugo Flores (Heber Tire Shop).
Hugo Flores was insured under a Grain Dealers commercial liability policy in effect on the date of the crash; the policy defines “occurrence” as an “accident” and lists per-occurrence limits of $500,000 and aggregate limits including a $1,000,000 Products-Completed Operations Aggregate.
Kubal (tractor-trailer) defendants sued for wrongful death and disputed how many policy “occurrences” arose from the events, seeking multiple occurrences (and thus larger recoveries); Grain Dealers sought a declaratory judgment limiting exposure to a single $500,000 occurrence.
Kubal argued (relying on Helme-style analysis and an Arizona appellate decision) that multiple causative acts can produce multiple occurrences; Grain Dealers argued the policy’s plain-language definition controls and there was only one accident.
The court resolved cross-motions for summary judgment, held the policy’s plain meaning governs, concluded there was one “occurrence” (the collision), applied the $500,000 per-occurrence limit (within the Products/Completed Operations aggregate), denied combining aggregates, and denied attorney’s fees.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Number of "occurrences" under the policy	"Occurrence" = accident; only one accident (the collision) → one occurrence	Multiple causative negligent acts mean multiple occurrences	Held for plaintiff: "occurrence" means accident; only one occurrence (the collision)
Whether causation-based (Helme) test applies	Plain policy language controls; no concession to causal test	Helme and related authority: count causative acts as occurrences	Court rejected Helme test here because policy defines occurrence as "accident," not "incident, act or omission"
Aggregates: whether multiple aggregates combine	Only Products/Completed Operations aggregate triggered; general aggregate not reached	Defendants sought to combine or otherwise obtain greater coverage	Court did not need to decide combination; held only one occurrence so $500,000 limit under Products/Completed Operations applies
Attorney's fees under A.R.S. § 12-341.01	Sought fees; no supporting basis provided	Opposed	Court declined fees in its discretion

GRE Ins. Grp. v. Green, 194 Ariz. 251 (Ct. App. 1999) (defines "accident" in insurance context and distinguishes negligence from accident)
Arizona Property & Casualty Ins. Guaranty Fund v. Helme, 153 Ariz. 129 (1987) (held multiple causative acts can constitute multiple occurrences where policy defined occurrence by causation)
Keggi v. Northbrook Prop. & Cas. Ins. Co., 199 Ariz. 43 (Ct. App. 2000) (insurance-policy interpretation is a question of law and courts apply plain meaning first)