Hamm v. Canal Insurance Co

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

ELVINA HAMM, as Personal

Representative and Ancillary

Administratrix of the Estates of

Janet Louise Hamm, deceased and

Jacqueline Elizabeth Hamm, deceased; KAREN RENAY HAMM, as

Co-Personal Representative and Co-

Ancillary Administratrix of the

Estate of Johnathan Alphonzo

Richardson, deceased; as Parent and

Natural Guardian of Arthur

Richardson, III, a minor, and David

Freedman, as duly appointed

Guardian ad Litem for minor child,

Arthur Richardson, III; ARTHUR No. 98-2068 RICHARDSON, JR., as Co-Personal

Representative and Co-Ancillary

Administrator of the Estate of

Johnathan Alphonzo Richardson, deceased; as Parent and Natural

Guardian of Arthur Richardson, III, a minor, and David Freedman, as duly appointed Guardian ad Litem for minor child, Arthur Richardson,

III; PATRICK A. WILLIAMS, SR., as

Personal Representative and

Ancillary Administrator of the

Estate of Patrick Anthony Williams,

Jr., deceased; THERESA HAMM, as Parent and Natural Guardian of

Steven Foster, a minor, and W.

David White, as duly appointed

Guardian ad Litem for minor child,

Steven Foster,

Plaintiffs-Appellants, v.

CANAL INSURANCE COMPANY,

Defendant-Appellee.

PARENTS AGAINST TIRED TRUCKERS;

CITIZENS FOR RELIABLE AND SAFE

HIGHWAYS,

Amici Curiae.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Durham.

James A. Beaty, Jr., District Judge. (CA-97-729-1)

Argued: March 4, 1999

Decided: April 21, 1999

Before HAMILTON and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges, and LEE, United States District Judge for the

Eastern District of Virginia, sitting by designation. _________________________________________________________________ Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. _________________________________________________________________ COUNSEL

ARGUED: Julia Wernett McInerny, COALE, COOLEY, LIETZ, MCINERNY & BROADUS, P.C., Washington, D.C., for Appellants.

Jeffrey Alan Burns, SHOOK, HARDY & BACON, L.L.P., Kansas City, Missouri, for Amici Curiae. Joseph Edward Wall, JORDAN, PRICE, WALL, GRAY & JONES, L.L.P., Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee. ON BRIEF: Charlsa D. Broadus, COALE, COOLEY, LIETZ, MCINERNY & BROADUS, P.C., Washington, D.C., for Appellants. Laura J. Wetsch, JORDAN, PRICE, WALL, GRAY & JONES, L.L.P., Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee. _________________________________________________________________ Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). _________________________________________________________________ OPINION

PER CURIAM:

Plaintiffs-appellants (the Hamms)* appeal the district court's grant of judgment on the pleadings, see Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(c), to Canal Insurance Company (Canal) on the Hamms' action seeking a declara- tion that Canal is directly liable to pay up to the limit of the policy (Policy) it issued to Virginia Hiway Express, an interstate motor car- rier, for each final judgment the Hamms obtain against Virginia Hiway Express. For the reasons that follow, we affirm.

I.

The essential facts are not in dispute. This case arises out of a July 8, 1995 collision (the Collision) near Salisbury, North Carolina. Trag- ically, a truck owned by Canal's insured, Virginia Hiway Express, an interstate motor carrier, struck the vehicles carrying Jacqueline Eliza- beth Hamm, Janet Louise Hamm, Johnathan Alphonzo Richardson, Arthur Richardson, III, Patrick Williams, Jr., Theresa Hamm, and Ste- ven Foster. As a result of the Collision, Jacqueline Elizabeth Hamm, Janet Louise Hamm, Johnathan Alphonzo Richardson, and Patrick Williams, Jr., died, and Arthur Richardson, III, Theresa Hamm, and Steven Foster suffered severe injuries.

Plaintiffs-appellants brought this declaratory judgment action in the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina seeking a declaration that Canal, pursuant to the Motor Carrier Act of 1980 (MCA), as amended, 49 U.S.C. § 13906(a), is directly liable to pay up to the limit of the Policy it issued to Virginia Hiway Express, an interstate motor carrier, for each final judgment the Hamms obtain against Virginia Hiway Express.

After answering the Hamms' complaint, Canal moved, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(c), for judgment on the pleadings, arguing that: (1) the Collision was only a single"accident" under the Policy and the MCA; and (2) Canal's potential financial obligation is limited by the terms of the Policy and the MCA to $1 million per accident. The Hamms contended that the Collision resulted in more than one "accident" and Canal's potential liability was greater than the Policy's limit of $1 million because the Policy conflicts with the MCA, which requires that the Policy's limit apply separately to each final judgment the Hamms obtain against Virginia Hiway Express. Agreeing with Canal's construction of the Policy and the MCA, the district court granted Canal's motion for judgment on the pleadings.

II.

Having had the benefit of oral argument and the parties' briefs, and after careful consideration of the record and the applicable law, we conclude that the district court correctly determined that the Collision was only a single "accident" under the Policy and the MCA. We fur- ther conclude that the district court correctly determined that Canal's potential financial obligation is limited by the terms of the Policy and the MCA to $1 million per accident. We therefore affirm on the rea- soning of the district court. See Elvina Hamm, et al. v. Canal Ins. Co., No. 1:97-CV-00729 (M.D.N.C. 1998).

AFFIRMED