Free Reply in Support of Motion - District Court of Arizona - Arizona

STEPHEN T1P>P>S
I Page 1 U
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
· FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA >_i
CASE NO. CIV—04—0662—PHX—DGC I
(MARICOPA COUNTY SUPERIOR
COURT CAUSE NO. CV 2004-00243B)
U—HAUL INTERNATIONAL, INC.; {
U-HAUL COMPANY OF PENNSYLVANIA; _
U—HAUL COMPANY OF FLORIDA; and I
REPUBLIC WESTERN INSURANCE. _
·COMPANY, ‘
Piainniffs, » V
v. L
LUMBERMENS MUTUAL CASUALTY 1
c0MPANY, {
Defendants. 3
DEPOSITION OF STEPHEN TIBBS i
JANUARY 22, 2005
1005 PASEO DEL PUEBLO SUR ,
TAOS, NEW MEXICO ·
PURSUANT TO THE FEDERAL RULES OF CIVIL i
PROCEDURE, THS DEPOSITION WAS TAKEN BY: I
MARK FRAGNER, ESQ. f
Attorney fox the Plaintiff AMERCO/U—HAUL {
REPORTED BY: MARY T. MACFARLANE, RPR, CCR ?
EXHIBIT i
.9
D
S
3 i_
TAOS DEPOSITION SERVICE
(505) vcag@;64¤iV-Ow&©Hs¢C47@&¤m§nA%%.’6 NP-HIGQEQXSIZ SOP 75*8384
Q9b§344fE@l9§dIl>bqagéb-830200fdc7cd

STEPHEN TTBBS
4 Page 32
1 Q. (BY MR. FRAGNER) When you say appropriate
2 amendments, you mean exceptions to what the policy would
3 follow form to? V
4 A. Yes. 7
3 Q. So you could have a policy that followed form to
3 another policy with certain exceptions? `
7 A. Uh—huh. E i
3 -Q. Okay. X
9 A. Yes. 7
19 Q. And in your experience in underwriting or g
11 supervising the underwriting excess of insurance following S
_ 12 form to a lead umbrella, was it your practice or the 7
T .... 13 practice in your department to review the policy to which 5
14 the lead umbrella —- l'm sorry, to review the policy to 9
13 which your policy was following the form? - g
13 A. You could not always do that, so on ordinary ;
17 practice, prior to the quotation or binding that was 7
18 normally not done, because normally those contracts were i
19 not issued. 3
29 Q. Okay. 7
21 V A. So we would rely on what the broker told us or Q
22 what was given to us by the broker. 7
23 Q. And did you have a practice of reviewing or T
24 obtaining the terms of any policy or policies underlying
23 the lead umbrella? _ .
TAOS DEPOSTTTON SERVICE
(5 O 5 ) 7 6£se @@>@—l:v—G>®lB€£IDI3Gl 7 ®J8oum3E1§*t®%r6 NM:il&l70‘§T03/2006 O EP)=age725cB =¢ 8 3 8 4
1o¤zs44¢ao7s.4dbb-¤sbb-as¤z¤of¤c7¤¤

STEPHEN TTBBS
1 Page lO3
1 in terms of when we summarized it, and the fact that
2 expenses were to be outside the limit.
3 Q. And that issue, that came up frequently?
4 A. Yeah. Because it was really the whole reason we
3 attached to contract was because expenses were to be
6 outside the limit. i
7 So every year that would have come up.
6 Q. Did it ever come up in the context of insurance, 1
3 either the Lumbermens' policy or the policy which had Q
16 provided for defense to be outside of the limits?
11 A. We would have felt that if the defense were 1
12 outside the limits we would have felt our follow was 1
.4.13 outside the limits, because the policy underneath was 1
,14 outside the limits. 2
16 Q. And what was the basis for your understanding E
16 n that the policy beneath was outside the limits? 1
17 A. Conversation with AON and applications with AON 1
16 over the years. 1
19 · Q. But never the result of an actual review of that 7
20 policy? 1
21 A. I don't know. 4
22 Q. Sorry? 1
23 A. I don't know. I don't know if the ——
24 MR. GILL: It's not clear. You mean his review
26 of the form or someone else's? · 1
TAGS DEPOSTTTON SERVICE
( 5 O 5) 7D5§G‘28($4O5i/-ObE%§1©@C 4 7|Z§10%ume7H1AQ$§-6 NH|e§ g9l7O7872OOi55 Olgjagge g gf84_ 8 3 8 4
10b2344iaO —4dbb-b9bb-830200fdc7cd

STEPHEN TTBBS
. U Page 112
1 the RUMM policy issued by Republic Western?
2 A. No, because we were told consistently through
9 AON that expenses were outside the limit.
1 Q. Okay. And l‘ll ask you the same question about
5 the 99RU policy. Did you have any discussions with anyone
5 about the definition of ultimate net loss in that policy? 1
1 A. No, because we were told consistently by AON Q
9 that expenses were outside the limit. 1
9 MR. GILL: What policy? S
19 MR. FRAGNER: The expenses for the RU. Q
11 A. (Continued) The expenses of the underlying 1
12 policies, so I'm not sure which one that would apply to. 1
gT19 Q. (BY MR. FRAGNER) Just so T have it straight: 1
11 At all relevant times —— Did T also mark this as an 1
15 exhibit yet? 220. It's 220. i
15 At all relevant times AON told you that all of E
11 the underlying Republic Western policies were defense 1
15 outside the limit policies? 1
19 A. We were told at all relevant times that the 1
20 policies we were attaching over had defense outside, so 1
21 that therefore we would be recognizing policies that were 1
22 not eroded by defense. · j
29 Q. Okay. Turning to 16344 and -5. 1
21 MR. GTLL: Okay. Give me a second. T'm sorry. I
25 16345, 344? h
TAOS DEPOSTTTON SERVICE
(5 O 5) 7C§2a§é‘ 7 |Qcg·>bUmg15t1%%-’6 NDI4i|e%Z)§/gg72O665 O Eg§eZ.%f84_ 8 3 8 4
10b2344#aO7 -4dbb-¤9¤b-a3¤zo¤rd¤7c¤

Case 2:04-cv-00662-DGC

Document 136-6

Filed 09/08/2006

Page 1 of 4

Case 2:04-cv-00662-DGC

Document 136-6

Filed 09/08/2006

Page 2 of 4

Case 2:04-cv-00662-DGC

Document 136-6

Filed 09/08/2006

Page 3 of 4

Case 2:04-cv-00662-DGC

Document 136-6

Filed 09/08/2006

Page 4 of 4