According to Hudson’s court pleadings, it says it discovered that Mr. Ybarra and Mr. Lozano were both employed by BlaMar through testimony given in the underlying lawsuit. Mr. Ybarra’s complaint alleged that he suffered injuries while he was in the passenger seat of the tractor-trailer operated by Lozano when he lost control causing injuries and property damage.
BlaMar had a commercial auto policy issued by the Hudson Insurance Company which contains an employer’s liability exclusion that allows Hudson to deny coverage for bodily injury to any BlaMar employee “arising out of and in the course of” their employment or while performing employment-related duties, according to the terms and conditions of the policy, which Hudson included in its amended complaint.
The language of the policy also includes a clause known as the “fellow employee exclusion,” which according to Hudson’s attorney, is the basis for denying coverage for Ybarra’s claims against Lozano.
Hudson’s attorney is seeking an order from the Texas federal court finding that it has no duty to defend BlaMar or Lozano, against Ybarra’s suit. Attorney Kendrick is arguing that the extrinsic evidence related to Ybarra’s employment status is permitted under the Texas Supreme Court’s ruling in the Bitco case.
