Summary Judgment reversed based on an ambiguous exclusion
The city of Kinloch, Missouri, had an insurance policy with Scottsdale. The policy had 4 parts: four separate “coverage forms” that apply to various types of claims, including “Employment Practices Liability Coverage Form Claims Made Coverage,” “General Liability Coverage Form Occurrence Coverage,” “Law Enforcement Liability Coverage Form Occurrence Coverage,” and “Public Officials Liability Coverage Form Claims Made Coverage.” Each “Coverage Form” has its own definitions, exclusions and declarations page. There was also a general exclusion page which applied to all the coverages.
In the General Liability Coverage form, there was a jail exclusion, but that exclusion did not appear in the general exclusions applicable to all coverages. Thus, the appellate court found there was a fact issue which precluded summary judgment. Summary judgment would only be appropriate if there was no insurance (and therefore, no sovereign immunity).
