Preview:

REPORTED IN THE COURT OF SPECIAL APPEALS OF MARYLAND No. 1768 September Term, 2003 Prince George's County v. Local Government Insurance Trust

Kenney, Eyler, Deborah S., Krauser, JJ.

Opinion by Krauser, J.

Filed: October 8, 2004

We are asked to resolve an insurance coverage dispute between appellant, Prince George's County (the "County"), and its excess liability insurer, appellee, Local Government Insurance Trust (the "Trust" or "LGIT").1 They disagree as to whether the County is

entitled to indemnification from the Trust for a judgment it paid, following a jury trial, to Freddie McCollum, Jr.2 for injuries he received at the hands of the Prince George's County police. This

dispute arose when the Trust denied the County's request for indemnification, asserting that the County had violated the terms of its excess liability policy, by, among other things, failing to notify the Trust of McCollum's claim before a verdict was rendered. That, in turn, prompted the County to file, in the Circuit Court for Prince George's County, the lawsuit that is now before us. In the complaint initiating that suit, the County alleged that it was the Trust, not it, that had violated the policy, and that the Trust had done so by denying the County the coverage for which it had contracted. To vindicate its rights, the County requested

a declaration, stating that it was "entitled to liability insurance coverage and indemnity with respect to the McCollum action" as well as "a judgment against defendant, LGIT, for all amounts paid in the

As described in appellee's brief, "[t]he Local Government Insurance Trust ("LGIT") is a non-profit association of approximately 163 Maryland local governments, the Maryland Municipal League ("MML") and the Maryland Association of Counties ("MACo") . . . that have contributed funds to risk sharing pools in order to provide a lower cost alternative to conventional insurance coverage pursuant to the authority granted under Sections 19-601 et seq . of the Insurance Article." It is "governed by a Board of Trustees[,] . . . which is composed of a cross section of municipal and county Members and a representative from MACo and MML."
2

1

McCollum`s wife and daughter were also parties to the suit.

McCollum [case] covered under the LGIT policy, including post judgment interest and attorneys' fees" and related expenses. Cross motions for summary judgment followed. Denying the County's motion but granting the Trust's, the circuit court ruled that the County was "not entitled to indemnity" from the Trust because it had "fail[ed] to give" the Trust the notice required by the policy. From that judgment, the County Re-ordered, but

noted this appeal, presenting three issues.

otherwise presented as they appear in appellant's brief, they are: I. Whether the trial court erred in finding that the County's claim was barred under the Commercial General Liability Policy because the County failed to comply with notice provisions of the policy. II. Whether the trial court erred in finding that the underlying claim did not constitute an "Occurrence" under the terms of the Commercial General Liability Policy issued by the Trust to Prince George's County. III. Whether the trial court erred in failing to find that the underlying claim asserted a claim of "Personal Injury" caused by an "Offense" as defined by the Commercial General Liability Policy issued by LGIT to the County. Because we conclude that the circuit court was correct in holding that the County's failure to comply with the notice

provisions of the parties' policy barred its claim against the Trust, we shall affirm the judgment of the circuit court without reaching issues II and III.

-2-

The McCollum Suit On June 28, 1997, Officer Robert McDaniel, a Prince George's County police officer, attempted to pull over fifty-year-old

Freddie McCollum, Jr. for failing to display a tag on the front of his vehicle. It is at this point that the incident, which resulted

in McCollum's lawsuit, began, and the parties' agreement as to what occurred ends. At trial, the parties predictably presented two

distinctly different versions of what followed. But, for our purposes, we need not delve deeply into what occurred that day. Suffice it to say that, as a result of the

fracas that ensued, McCollum suffered substantial and permanent injuries, including the loss of his right eye. Although ultimately convicted of two minor traffic infractions,3 he was acquitted of the principal charges that were subsequently lodged against him: assault and resisting arrest. After those criminal proceedings ended, McCollum, his wife, and his daughter brought suit against the County and three County police officers in the United States District Court for the

District of Maryland for assault, battery, false arrest, malicious prosecution, and violations of both federal and state civil rights acts. The suit alleged that, when the officers committed the torts, they were acting within the scope of their

foregoing

3 He was convicted of displaying an improper registration plate, in violation of Md. Code (1977, 2002 Repl. Vol.),

Download Prince George's County v. LGIT.pdf

Maryland Law