Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

HARBOR INS. CO. v. LEWIS

April 26, 1983

HARBOR INSURANCE COMPANY
v.
ANDREW L. LEWIS and JOSEPH L. CASTLE, Trustees for READING COMPANY and EDWARD and PATRICIA SCARBOROUGH and CITY OF PHILADELPHIA



The opinion of the court was delivered by: HUYETT

 HUYETT, J.

 This diversity suit originated as a declaratory judgment action brought by petitioner Harbor Insurance Company (Harbor), seeking a determination of the extent of its obligations owing to Reading Railroad Company (Reading) in connection with a verdict rendered against Reading and the City of Philadelphia. That verdict was returned by a jury in the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia in an action brought by respondents, Edward and Patricia Scarborough. The suit was based upon an accident in which Edward Scarborough suffered severe injuries after being run over by a train operated by Reading in an area located near a fence that the City was found to have negligently maintained. Apparently the young boy wandered through the fence and on to the tracks, fell off and landed under the train. The Scarboroughs brought the action against Reading, and Reading joined the City as an additional defendant. The jury found that Reading and the City were jointly and severably liable and rendered a verdict of over three million dollars for the Scarboroughs.

 After Harbor initiated this action, the City sought and was granted leave to intervene as a respondent, so that it might obtain a determination of its respective rights and duties regarding the Scarborough verdict. Specifically, the City seeks a declaration that it was covered under the additional insured provision of the Harbor policy for its losses arising from the Scarborough action.

 This provision, endorsement number 8 to the Harbor policy, provides:

 
ADDITIONAL INSUREDS
 
IT IS AGREED THAT THE INSURANCE AFFORDED BY THIS POLICY SHALL APPLY TO THE FOLLOWING ADDITIONAL INSUREDS BUT ONLY TO THE EXTENT OF LIABILITY RESULTING FROM OCCURRENCES ARISING OUT OF NEGLIGENCE OF READING COMPANY AND/OR ITS WHOLLY OWNED SUBSIDIARIES:
 
PASSENGER SERVICE IMPROVEMENT CORPORATION OF PHILADELPHIA.
 
CITY OF PHILADELPHIA.
 
SOUTHEASTERN PENNSYLVANIA TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY.
 
COUNTY OF MONTGOMERY. STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA.
 
COUNTY OF CHESTER. STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA.
 
COUNTY OF BUCKS. STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA.
 
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA. UNITED STATES ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.