Negligent Supervision of Vehicle Ruled Sole Proximate Cause of Injury
In State Farm Fire & Cas. Co. v. Abesamis, Darline Abesamis, a passenger in a van that was transporting goods to New Orleans, was insured in an automobile accident. Rossano Tolentino, the driver, fell asleep at the wheel. The van veered off the highway and overturned. As a result, Abesamis was ejected from her seat.
In her complaint, Abesamis alleged negligence and negligent supervision against Ko, the employer, Ko d/b/a 1 Chiban Inc. (“Chiban”), and the driver, Rossano Tolentino. Specifically, Abesamis alleged that Ko directed his employees to transport merchandise from Chicago, Illinois, to New Orleans, Louisiana. Ko knew that Abesamis would accompany his employees on this trip. Further, Abesamis alleged that Ko instructed his employees to make this 14-hour, non-stop journey at night, despite the fact that he knew that they worked the previous day. With regard to the claim of negligent supervision, Abesamis alleged that Ko negligently packed and secured the merchandise in the cargo hold of the van and negligently allowed three passengers to occupy the two-seat van.
State Farm had issued an automobile policy to Ko, as well as a business policy to Chiban. State Farm tendered its automobile policy limits of $100,000 in an effort to settle the claim. State Farm, however, also filed an instant declaratory judgment in which it alleged that its business policy did not cover the incident because of the policy’s motor vehicle exclusion. According to the exclusion, the insurance did not apply “to bodily injury or property damage arising out of the ownership, maintenance, use or entrustment to others of any aircraft, auto, or watercraft owned or operated by or rented or loaned to any insured. Use includes operation and loading or unloading.”
The court reviewed whether a negligent supervision claim arising from a vehicle-related occurrence must be completely independent of any negligent operation of the vehicle. Abesamis failed to identify any act of negligent supervision by Ko that did not depend on some form of vehicle negligence, whether it be the circumstances under which the vehicle was driven, the way in which the cargo was loaded, or the number of passengers allowed to occupy the vehicle. Because the success of Abesmis negligent supervision claim against Chiban premised on the negligent usage and operation of the vehicle, coverage is necessarily precluded by the motor vehicle exclusion in State Farm’s policy. Consequently, the court held that negligent supervision, and not negligent operation or use of the vehicle, must be the sole proximate cause of the injury.
State Farm Fire & Cas. Co. v. Abesamis, 2012 IL App (1st) 120541-U, Not Reported in N.E.2d, 2012 WL 6964879 (Ill.App. 1 Dist.,2012). (Filed under Supreme Court Rule 23 and may not be cited as precedent by any party except in the limited circumstances allowed under Rule 23(e)(1)).
