Laserfiche WebLink
Washington appellate courts have never addressed the consequences of the <br />Legislature's exemption of a risk pool from the definition of insurer in RCW 48.01.050, <br />and have never addressed whether a joint governmental self-insurance pool under RCW <br />ch. 48.62 has the liabilities and is subject to extra -contractual remedies of a commercial <br />insurer. Washington courts have never addressed whether an employee, who has a <br />statutory right of indemnification, may assign claims pertaining to defense and <br />indemnification as an "insured" under a commercial liability policy. In Clark County v. <br />WCRP, Cowlitz County No. 12-2-00557-6, the superior court held that WCRP is not an <br />"insurer," is not subject to the obligations of a commercial insurer and had no duty to <br />defend Clark County from a claim alleging civil rights violations for the wrongful <br />conviction in 1985, 17 years before Clark County joined WCRP. Clark County did not <br />appeal that decision. <br />In a case involving WCRP and a member county, the Court of Appeals held that <br />WCRP's obligation to defend and indemnify a county judge in disciplinary proceedings <br />is "subject to and conditioned upon the provisions of RCW 4.96.041." Colby u. Yakima <br />Cty., 133 Wn. App. 386, 393, 136 P,3d 131 (2006). Other cases that have been cited by <br />petitioners involve the duties of commercial insurers that are excess to the coverage <br />provided by a risk pool, e.g., PUD No. i of Klickitat County u. Int'1 Ins. Co., 124 W11.2d <br />890, 881 P.2d 1020 (1994) (assignments of rights under "excess coverage" policies); <br />Transcontinental u. WPUDUS, 111 Wn.2d 452, 76o P.2d 337 (1988) (considering <br />insured's rights under special excess liability policies"), or the terms of coverage under a <br />policy issued by a public utility risk pool formed many years before the Legislature <br />authorized joint governmental self-insurance pools in 1974. See WPUDUS v. PUD No. z <br />of Clallam County, 112 Wn.2d 1, 10, 771 P.2d 701(1989). <br />9. Is there any county that is a party on the other side of the case? <br />Yes. Clark County. <br />10. What resource will you make available to assist in the preparation of <br />the amicus brief? <br />Share all briefing filed to date and provide an electronic copy of the record. <br />11. Name of requester, representing <br />BOARD OF COUNTY COMISSIONERS <br />11 <br />WSAC Board of Director's Meeting February 3, 2016 Page 20 of 80 <br />