Mr. Doucet eventually brought a tort action against the sheriff's department, the sheriff, and their insurer, Allied World Insurance Company.

He alleged, among other things, that the accident had been caused by a defective chair owned by the sheriff's department and located on premises occupied by the department. He alleged that the defective chair had created an unreasonable risk of injury, that the department or the sheriff had known or should have known that the chair could expose the user to injury, and that the department had been negligent in failing to maintain the chair.

Allied World moved for summary judgment asserting there was no coverage for the alleged accident under its police professional liability policy.

The trial court found ambiguity in the provisions of the policy and denied summary judgment as to coverage under the policy. An appellate court affirmed, and the dispute reached the Supreme Court of Louisiana.

The Allied World Policy

The Allied World policy obligated Allied World to pay:

Loss which the Insured is legally obligated to pay as a result of a Claim … for a Law Enforcement Wrongful Act

, defined as:

an actual or alleged act, error or omission, neglect or breach of duty by an Insured: (1) which arises out of and is committed during the course and scope of Law Enforcement Activities, or (2) which arises out of the ownership, maintenance and use of Premises by the Insured for the purpose of conducting Law Enforcement Activities; and which results in Personal Injury, Bodily Injury or Property Damage. 

The policy defined:

Law Enforcement Activities

as:

law enforcement-related duties conducted by any Insured for or on behalf of the Named Insured…. 

It defined:

Premises

as:

the location in ITEM 1. of the Declarations

any jail, holding cell or lock-up facility, owned or leased by, and operated by, the Named Insured at the location designated in ITEM 1. of the Declarations 

and

any other location specifically scheduled in an Endorsement to this Policy

The policy also excluded:

Personal Injury or Bodily Injury to an employee of the Insured arising out of and in the course and scope of employment by the Insured

It also restricted the definitions of “Personal Injury” and “Bodily Injury” to injuries:

alleged against an Insured by an entity or person who is not an Insured 

The court reversed the lower courts' rulings and granted summary judgment in favor of Allied World.

In its decision, the court found the alleged accident had not arisen out of the use of a scheduled “Premise” as identified in the policy. It noted that ITEM 1. on the Declarations page provided the address of 200 Court Street, Suite 100, Ville Platte, Louisiana, and that Endorsement PGU 1043 to the policy listed 415 West Cotton, Ville Platte, Louisiana, as additional covered Premises.

The court pointed out that the alleged accident had occurred at an automobile repair shop located at 412 South Soileau Street, Ville Platte, Louisiana, and not “at either of the scheduled locations identified in the policy.”

Moreover, the court noted that Mr. Doucet had admitted that he was employed as a deputy sheriff, was an employee of the sheriff's department, and was injured while in the course and scope of his employment at the sheriff's department automobile repair shop. The court said that, applying the “ordinary and prevailing meaning of employee,” Mr. Doucet was clearly an employee of the sheriff's department and thus an “Insured” under the policy, which meant that his claims were not covered by the policy's definition of “Bodily Injury” and the specific provision excluding coverage for “Bodily Injury.”

Accordingly, the court concluded that the injuries allegedly sustained by Mr. Doucet “in the course and scope of his employment at a location not listed in the policy would not be covered by the policy.”

The case is Doucet v. Darwin Select Ins. Co., No. 2016–C–1989 (La. Feb. 3, 2017).