Court Opinion

ID: 9483563
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-05 09:24:26.179612+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:49:41.806908
License: Public Domain

JOHN R. GIBSON, Circuit Judge,
dissenting.
I respectfully dissent.
I would affirm on the basis of the district court’s opinion.
The Miles and Capitol Indemnity admittedly had an opportunity to participate in negotiation of settlements with the 130 car owners, refused to do so or to contribute, and had full knowledge of the settlements that Eagle-Picher concluded. Under these circumstances, I cannot agree with the court today that the contribution claim is a fortuity.
The contribution claim is for damage to one organization, Eagle-Picher, as a result of the one occurrence, Miles’ work in spray painting the Eagle-Picher building. Under the facts presented in this case and the policy before us, I think the district court did not err in holding that there was one claim to which only one deductible applied. I would affirm.