SACRAMENTO — An insurance company suing an agriculture company that claimed it was not covered at the time of an accident has obtained a stay in court.
U.S. District Judge Anthony Ishii, on the bench of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California, issued a 20-page ruling on Dec. 19 granting a stay in the lawsuit filed by Integon Preferred Insurance Company against Isabella Alvarez Camacho, X-Treme Ag Labor, and Valley Garlic Inc.
The court granted a stay for the suit until Mar. 22, 2019.
Integon sued the companies alleging that it was not required to provide coverage due to an exclusion clause, arguing that accidents during the course of employment were not covered, and claimed X-Treme had failed to disclose that it provided transportation to its own employees.
Camacho, a principal for agricultural contractor X-Treme, applied for the policy in March 2014.
"Integon agreed to pay damages for which X-Treme was legally liable because of bodily injury and property damage caused by an accident and arising out of the ownership, maintenance, or use of an insured car, subject to the policy’s exclusions," the ruling said.
The exclusion that states that the policy does not cover “bodily injury or property damage arising out of the ownership, maintenance or use of an auto, other than your insured auto, which is owned by or furnished or available for regular use by you,” it said.
On June 20, 2015, "several of X-Treme’s employees traveled home together in a van after a day’s work at one of Valley Garlic’s farms in Gilroy, California," with the van driver instructed to drive the workers home, the ruling said.
The driver fell asleep while driving on California State Route 152, when he swerved, overcorrected, and rolled the van over, with four passengers killed and several injured.
Families of the victims sued X-Treme and Valley Garlic in a state court.
In his ruling, Judge Ishii stated that "the Court assumes that if the state trial begins on January 22, 2019, then the state trial will conclude by Mar. 22, 2019," as the judge will wait for the decision on the California court suit to make a final ruling.
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California Case number 1:16-cv-01496-AWI-SAB