United States District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
For NCMIC INSURANCE COMPANY, Plaintiff: ROBERT W. JOZWIK, LEAD ATTORNEY, MARSHALL DENNEHEY WARNER COLEMAN & GOGGIN, PHILADELPHIA, PA.
For CHRISTOPHER V. WALCOTT DC, Defendant: MICHAEL J. ENGLE, LEAD ATTORNEY, GREENBLATT PIERCE ENGLE FUNT FLORES, PHILADELPHIA, PA.
For NANNETTE BIEBER, Defendant: DAVID COLLIN WILLIAMS, MICHAEL A. TRUNK, KLINE & SPECTER, P.C., PHILADELPHIA, PA.
CYNTHIA M. RUFE, J.
NCMIC Insurance Company issued a professional liability policy to Named Insured, Defendant Dr. Walcott, a chiropractor, for the period of March 19, 2011 to March 19, 2012. A female patient (" the Patient" ) sued Dr. Walcott and two related entities in state court alleging sexual assault, based on an incident that occurred on July 30, 2011 (the " Underlying Action" ). When the Underlying Action was filed, Dr. Walcott provided a copy of the Underlying Complaint to NCMIC and requested defense and indemnification. NCMIC agreed to defend Dr. Walcott, subject to a reservation of rights, and then filed this suit, seeking a declaratory judgment that it was not obligated to defend or indemnify Dr. Walcott under the policy. Presently before the Court is NCMIC's Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings.
II. Standard of Review
A court may only grant a Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(c), " if, on the basis of the pleadings, the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law."  A judgment as a matter of law is appropriate only " when no material issue of fact exists. . . ."  When deciding a Rule 12(c) motion, a court is allowed to consider " the pleadings and attached exhibits, undisputedly authentic documents attached to the motion for judgment on the pleadings if plaintiffs' claims are based on the documents, and matters of public record" in making its decision. For the purposes of this motion, the Court will consider the pleadings, the relevant insurance policy and its supplemental endorsements, and the complaint filed in the Underlying Action.
NCMIC argues both that it has no duty to defend Dr. Walcott in the underlying lawsuit and that it has no duty to indemnify him, pointing to several exclusions of coverage in the relevant policy.
The cause of action asserted in an underlying complaint is neither dispositive nor determinative of whether a particular incident falls under a policy's coverage. " Instead it is necessary to look at the factual allegations contained in the [underlying] complaint," and at the scope of
the policy terms, to make a determination of ...