Travelers is trying to end its defense in a fatal Spokane crash, saying the wreck had nothing to do with the paving it insured.
The carrier filed suit on September 3, 2026, in federal court in Spokane, asking a judge to release it from defending Spokane County and its road contractor - and to hand those costs to four rival insurers.
The chain starts with a construction job. Spokane County hired Scarsella Bros. Inc. to build out the Bigelow Gulch Road Project 5 on March 17, 2020, according to the complaint. Scarsella subcontracted the paving to Poe Asphalt Paving, which finished on September 18, 2020. Poe's subcontract required commercial general liability cover of "$3,000,000 per occurrence" and "$3,000,000 annual aggregate (project specific)," and named the county and the contractor as additional insureds - meaning they could tap Poe's coverage for claims tied to Poe's work.
Poe's insurer was Travelers. Its primary policy carried a $1,000,000 each-occurrence limit and a $2,000,000 aggregate over a $1,000 deductible, the filing says, with an excess and umbrella policy adding $4,000,000 above a $10,000 retention.
The loss came on October 11, 2020, at about 2:12 a.m. A driver on North Forker Road drove through the end of the street and down an embankment, the complaint says. He was killed and his wife was injured.
In 2023, his estate and widow sued the county, its public works department and Scarsella. That suit alleges the road had been re-routed without adequate warning, that guardrails were missing, and that signs meant to warn drivers were "lying on the ground covered in hydroseed" - hydroseed the filing attributes, on information and belief, to King Hydroseeding.
Because Poe's contract named the county and Scarsella as additional insureds, Travelers agreed to defend both under a full reservation of rights - a stance that lets an insurer fund a defense while keeping the option to deny coverage later. It sent its first reservation letters on November 18, 2024, the complaint states.
The whole dispute now turns on one phrase. Poe's blanket additional-insured endorsement extends coverage "only if the injury or damage arises out of 'your work' to which the written contract or agreement applies." Poe's work was paving. The alleged failures - the re-routing, the missing guardrails, the downed signs, the hydroseed - do not arise out of that paving, Travelers argues, so the county and Scarsella never qualified for coverage on this loss.
Travelers also wants the defense reassigned. It says Liberty Mutual, which issued Scarsella its own general liability policy and which the complaint says has been defending Scarsella, should carry that defense as the primary insurer. And it says Ohio Security, West American and Ohio Casualty - the three carriers on King Hydroseeding's policies, which the filing says are already defending the county - should be primary for the county. Beyond the coverage rulings it is after, Travelers wants to recover the defense money it says those insurers should have paid.
The estate and the widow are named as defendants as well, so any coverage ruling would bind them.
The claims in the complaint are allegations that have not been tested, and no court has ruled on Travelers' request.
