Please E-mail suggested additions, comments and/or corrections to Kent@MoreLaw.Com.

Help support the publication of case reports on MoreLaw

Quigg Brothers-Schermer v. Commerical Union Insurance Company

Date: 09-05-2000

Case Number: 98-36070, 98-36168

Judge: Reavley

Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Plaintiff's Attorney: Charles Scott Penner and James E. Lobsenz of Carney, Badley, Smith & spellman, Seattle, Washington

Defendant's Attorney: Dennis M. Moran of Le Gros, Buchanan & Paul Seattle, Washington

Description:
This appeal presents an insurance coverage question. International
Marine Underwriters (IMU), a division of Commercial
Union Insurance Company, appeals the judgment in favor
of Quigg Brothers-Schermer, Inc. (Quigg Brothers). We
reverse and render.


During a storm in November, 1995, two of the Quigg
Brothers' construction barges, the SKOOKUM and the NO. 11
SCOW, broke from their moorings near the mouth of the Quillayute
River and were carried downstream to La Push Harbor.
The barges eventually landed on First Beach within the Quileute
Indian Reservation, adjoining the coastal waters within
the Olympic Coast National Marine Sanctuary. The presence
of the barges on First Beach created several liability risks,
including the possibility that the barges might wash back into
the sanctuary or discharge oil, resulting in fines for nonconforming
use and reimbursement for government removal.
Quigg Brothers acted swiftly to secure, repair and tow the
barges back to the Quigg Brothers' yard, incurring a total cost
of $53,796.81.


Quigg Brothers obtained a marine subscription insurance policy which included both hull insurance clauses and protec-
10956
tion and indemnity (P & I) insurance clauses. Quigg Brothers
maintained P & I insurance on its entire fleet but maintained
hull coverage on only two vessels, electing to save on premiums
and bear its own hull risks on the remaining vessels,
including the SKOOKUM and the NO . 11 SCOW. IMU was the
underwriter for 75% of the Quigg Brothers' subscription policy.
Quigg Brothers submitted a claim to IMU for the
expenses relating to the barges, seeking coverage under the
P & I clauses for wreck removal and fines and penalties,
which read:

* * *

Click the case caption above for the full text of the
Court's opinion.

Outcome:
Reversed and remanded.
Plaintiff's Experts:
Unknown
Defendant's Experts:
Unknown
Comments:
None

About This Case

What was the outcome of Quigg Brothers-Schermer v. Commerical Union Insurance Com...?

The outcome was: Reversed and remanded.

Which court heard Quigg Brothers-Schermer v. Commerical Union Insurance Com...?

This case was heard in United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, WA. The presiding judge was Reavley.

Who were the attorneys in Quigg Brothers-Schermer v. Commerical Union Insurance Com...?

Plaintiff's attorney: Charles Scott Penner and James E. Lobsenz of Carney, Badley, Smith & spellman, Seattle, Washington. Defendant's attorney: Dennis M. Moran of Le Gros, Buchanan & Paul Seattle, Washington.

When was Quigg Brothers-Schermer v. Commerical Union Insurance Com... decided?

This case was decided on September 5, 2000.