An insurer sought a declaration determining which of two insurance policies responded to liability arising from a motor vehicle collision involving a rented vehicle operated by an employee of a production company.
The dispute turned on whether the vehicle had been leased under a single agreement exceeding 30 days, triggering coverage under a commercial general liability policy, or under a series of shorter rental contracts that would leave coverage under a standard automobile policy.
The respondent argued the issue was barred by issue estoppel following earlier proceedings and an appellate decision.
The court held that the prior appellate ruling set aside the earlier decision only because the evidentiary record was insufficient and therefore did not create issue estoppel on the substantive question.
Interpreting the limited documentary record, the court concluded the rental arrangement constituted a single agreement of more than 30 days and that the respondent insurer was required to respond.
