2009AP001422 Siebert v. Wisconsin American Mutual Ins. Co.

Listen to this article

Insurance
Automobile policies; negligent entrustment

An insurer is not liable for its insureds’ negligent entrustment of a vehicle if the driver was not negligent in his operation of the vehicle.

“Bankert and Malone teach us that there is no coverage for Koehler’s alleged negligent entrustment of the vehicle to Raddatz because that act is not an independent concurrent cause of Jessica Siebert’s injuries. More specifically, Koehler’s alleged negligent entrustment could not render her liable for Jessica Siebert’s injuries without the occurrence of an excluded risk——Raddatz’s alleged negligent operation of the vehicle. See Bankert, 110 Wis. 2d at 484; Malone, 221 Wis. 2d at 99. Indeed, it is Raddatz’s alleged negligent operation of the vehicle that makes Koehler’s alleged negligent entrustment relevant at all. See Bankert, 110 Wis. 2d at 476, 478.”

“We conclude that the alleged negligent entrustment of the vehicle does not constitute an independent concurrent cause of Jessica Siebert’s injuries sufficient to trigger coverage, when no coverage exists for the alleged negligent operation of the vehicle. Specifically, the alleged negligent entrustment of the vehicle is not actionable without the occurrence of an excluded risk——the alleged negligent operation of the vehicle. Therefore, there is no coverage for Siebert’s negligent entrustment claim, and Wisconsin American is entitled to summary judgment.”

Reversed.

2009AP001422 Siebert v. Wisconsin American Mutual Ins. Co.

Ziegler, J.

Attorneys: For Appellant: Weis, Dana J., Rhinelander; Lanford, Rhonda L., Madison; For Respondent: Swietlik, John M., Jr., Milwaukee; Aiken, Michael D., Milwaukee

Full Text