Lumbermens Mutual Casualty Company v. Ludwig Submitted Under Third Circuit L.A.R. 34.1 a September 23, 2008

NOT PRECEDENTIAL
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT
__________
No. 07-4028
__________
LUMBERMENS MUTUAL CASUALTY COMPANY,
Appellant,
vs.
ERIE INSURANCE COMPANY,
Appellee.
__________
On Appeal from the United States District Court
For the Eastern District of Pennsylvania
(Civ. No. 05-3490)
District Court Judge: Honorable Edmund V. Ludwig
___________
Submitted Under Third Circuit L.A.R. 34.1(a)
September 23, 2008
___________
Before: BARRY, AMBRO and GARTH, Circuit Judges,
Opinion Filed: October 10, 2008
___________
OPINION
___________
GARTH, Circuit Judge:
Lumbermens Mutual Casualty Company brought this declaratory judgment action

-- 1 of 3 --

Erie is incorrectly identified as “Erie Insurance Company” in the caption.1
Cuthbertson was a passenger in a vehicle driven by Michael Donovan, who2
collided with another vehicle when he did not see “an obstructed and otherwise difficult
to observe stop sign . . . due to a combination of factors, including tree branches,
vegetation, bushes, brush and grass which obstructed visibility of eastbound drivers west
of the stop sign.” Appellant’s Br. 2-3.
-2-
against Erie Insurance Exchange to obtain a determination of whether it has an obligation1
to defend or indemnify Czop/Specter, Inc. in a personal injury action that Donald
Cuthbertson, Jr., brought against Czop and others. On October 4, 2007, the District2
Court granted summary judgment in favor of Erie and against Lumbermens. Our review
is plenary. Our jurisdiction stems from a final order. 28 U.S.C. § 1291.
Czop was the contractor responsible for performing roadside inspection services
on behalf of the Department of Transportation of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania
(“PennDOT”). It held two insurance policies: one payable by Erie under policy number
Q48 0150571 A, and one payable by Lumbermens under policy number QL016315-00.
The Erie policy was a general liability policy that excluded coverage of claims arising
from “service[s] of a professional nature,” including “supervisory, inspection, or
engineering services.” The Lumbermens policy, conversely, provided coverage only for
claims regarding “professional services,” which was defined to include “those services
that the [i]nsured is legally qualified to perform for others in the [i]nsured’s capacity as an
architect, engineer, land surveyor, landscape architect, construction manager or as defined
by endorsement to the policy.”

-- 2 of 3 --

-3-
Lumbermens now claims it should not have to pay for Czop’s liability because the
task of inspecting and maintaining roadside safety does not qualify as a “professional
service.” This argument has no merit.
David Riley, the employee hired by Czop to conduct the roadside inspections,
performed specialized tasks. See Harad v. Aetna Cas. & Sur. Co., 839 F.2d 979, 984 (3d
Cir. 1988). He conducted inspections and made arrangements for other contractors to
perform any necessary labor; he did not clear the roads himself. Lumbermens’s efforts to
minimize Riley’s education, training, and job function do not diminish the fact that the
services he performed were professional services.
Accordingly, we will affirm the District Court’s order.

-- 3 of 3 --