Opinion ID: 487784
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 6

Heading: Hinds County's Claim

Text: 45 Hinds County pled only its right to garnishment. It did not plead that it suffered an insured loss itself. As set out above, however, the County wrote Forum on April 7, 1983, to file a claim on [our] policy to recover for [Richardson's] wrongful acts. Thus, the County seemingly filed a claim for its own loss, which Forum denied. Much of the argument of the parties in the district court and on this appeal has been directed at such a substantive claim for loss by Hinds County under the policy, unrelated to garnishment to collect a judgment. We briefly, therefore, explain that Hinds County is not insured for the loss caused by Richardson's failure to collect taxes. 46 The insurance policy covers only claims against the insured. No claim has been made against the County, and the County has not, in the words of the policy, become legally obligated to pay ... damages to anyone. Moreover, the County does not contend that it is required or permitted by law to indemnify Richardson. Thus, the plain meaning of the Insuring Clause reveals that Forum is not liable to the County for Richardson's failure to collect taxes. 6