Volpi v. Westport Insurance Corporation - Order Denying Motion to Dismiss

1 IN THE SUPERIOR COU RT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE AUSTI N VOLP I,)) Plain tiff,)) C.A. No. N25 C -08- 232 FWW v.)) WEST PORT I NS URAN CE) CORPORATION,)) Defe nda nt.) S ubmit ted: Nove mber 28, 2025 Decid ed: Februa ry 18, 202 6 U pon Def endant We stport Insuran ce Corpo ratio n’s Motion to Dismis s the Compl aint, DENIE D. ORD ER J ason D. Warre n, Esqu ire, SH ELSBY & L EONI, 331 Mai n Stree t, Wilm ingto n, DE 19 804, a ttor ney for Pla intiff Aus tin Vol pi. C. S cott Re ese, Es quire, COOC H AND TA YLOR, P.A., 1000 N. West S tree t, Suite 1 500, Wilming ton, D E 19801, attor ney f or Def end ant Westpor t I nsura nce Corp orati on. WHA RTON, J.

2 This 18 th d ay of February 2026 upo n con side rat ion of De fe ndan t Westpo rt Insur ance Co rporatio n’s (“Westpo rt”) Mot ion to Dis miss the Compla int (“Motion”), 1 Plai ntiff Austin V olpi ’s (“Volpi”) Respons e in Opposi tion, 2 West port ’s Re ply Mem ora ndum in Su ppor t of it s Mo tion, 3 and the rec ord in thi s case, it appear s to the Court th at: 1. Volpi f ile d a com pla int f or da mage s aga ins t Reho both M ari na Vent ures, LLC (“ the Mari na”) a nd Jac ob Sin ger on Aug ust 28, 20 23. 4 Th e Compl aint a ri ses fr om a b oati ng acc ide nt that occ urre d on Au gus t 26, 2 022. 5 Volpi was a pa sse nge r on a water craf t tha t wa s re nted from the Mar ina locate d in the Re hob oth Ba y. 6 Jacob S inger was pi lotin g the v esse l at t he time of the inci dent. 7 Volp i alle ges t hat w hile t he pass enger s co ngreg ate d to take a p hotog raph, he fel l off the vesse l a nd the n was struc k by the pro pel lor and suffe red i njur y. 8 Volpi furt he r a llege s tha t the Mar ina ’s fai lure to tr ain Si nge r is the reas on Singer left the boa t in ge ar c ausi ng the pro pellor to c ontin ue 1 Def.’ s Mo t. to D ismi ss, D. I. 9. (“MT D”) 2 Pl.’s. Resp. to M TD, D.I. 1 1. 3 Def.’s Reply to MTD, D.I. 12. 4 Com pl., D.I. 1. S ee al so, Volp i v. Mar in V entu res, L LC and J ac ob Sin ger, C.A. N o.: S 23C - 08 - 0 35 RHR. 5 Com pl. at ¶¶ 7 - 9. 6 Id. 7 Id. 8 Id.

3 runni ng whe n he st epp ed awa y to ta ke th e pict ure of the passe nger s,. 9 Th e tort ac tio n aga inst the M arina and S inge r has b een stay ed pe ndi ng res olu tion of thi s acti on. 10 2. Westpo rt Insu ran ce Com pany is a Mi ssour i Corp orati on tha t is licen sed t o iss ue an d prov ide i nsura nce in the state of Dela ware and iss ued a liab ility p olic y to t he Mari na. 11 Westport de nied c overa ge t o the Mar ina a n d Singer for th e inci dent. 12 Volp i brou ght t his de clara tor y judg me nt action in whic h he see ks to fo rce Wes tpor t to defe nd and in dem nif y the Mar ina and Singer in the un derly ing act ion. 13 3. West port m ove s to dism iss Volpi’s Compl aint und er Superior Court R ule s 12(b)(1) and 1 2(b) (6) f or l ack of s tan ding. 14 Accord ing to Westpo rt, Volpi, as an in jure d thir d par ty, m ay not br ing a direc t acti on aga ins t the t ortfe asor’ s in sure r abs ent a re co gnize d exce pti on. 15 4. Volpi respon ds th at he has s tand ing be cause he is a n inte nded insur ed un der the Mari na’ s polic y wit h West port (“t he p olic y”), or, at 9 Pl.’s. Resp. to M TD at 2. 10 Id. at 3. 11 Compl. at ¶¶ 2, 6. 12 Id. at ¶¶ 1 3 - 15. 13 Id. at ¶¶ 18 - 21. 14 Def.’ s MTD a t 1. 15 Id.

4 minim um, he i s an inte nded thir d‑pa rty benef icia ry. 16 He poin ts to the insu r anc e agr eeme nt an d the polic y’s me dica l payme nts pr ovis ion tha t pays medic al ex pense s for bodil y inj ury occ urr ing, a mong ot her ci rcu mstan ces, o n insur ed w aterc raf t s, r egar dles s of fa ult. 17 The r ele vant sect ion s of t he po lic y are Cove rage A a nd Sect ion D: COVERAGE A: BODILY INJU RY AND PROPE RTY DAMAGE LIABI LITY 1. INSUR IN G AGR EEME NT a. We wi ll pa y tho se sum s tha t the Ins ure d beco mes le ga lly obliga te d to pa y a s dama ges beca use o f “bod ily injur y” or “prop ert y dama ge” to w hich thi s insur anc e ap plie s. W e will have the ri ght a nd d uty t o defe nd t he I nsure d agai nst a ny “ suit ” seeki ng tho se dama ges. Howe ver, we will have no d uty t o defe nd the In sured aga inst a ny “suit” seek ing dam age s for “bod ily in jury” or “ proper ty da ma ge” to whic h thi s insur anc e does n ot app ly. W e may, a t our di scre tion, i nves tiga te any “occ urrenc e” a nd se ttle any c laim or “s uit” that ma y re sult. 18 SECTIO N D: MED ICAL PAY MENT 1. INSUR IN G AGR EEME NT a. We will pa y me di cal e xpense s a s descr ibe d belo w for “bod ily in jury” cau sed b y an ac cide nt: (1) On prem ise s you own or re nt; (2) On wa ys next to p remise s you own or rent; or (3) Bec au se of y our o pera tions; pro vide d that: (a) T he acc ide nt tak es p lace in the “ cove ra ge T errit ory” and duri ng the Pol icy per iod; (b) The ex pense s are inc urred a nd re por ted t o us withi n one (1) ye ar of th e date of the acci dent; and 16 Pl.’s. Resp. to M TD at 4. 17 Id. at 5., C ompl. at ¶ 10. 18 Pl.’s. Resp. to M TD at 4., Ex. A at 2., C ompl. a t ¶ 10.

5 (c) The inju red person submits to exam inat ion, at o ur exp ense, by phys icia ns of our ch oice as of ten as we rea sona bly re quir e. (4) On “ ins ure d water craf t” b. We w ill ma ke t hes e paym ent s regar dle ss of fa ult. 19 Volpi cont ends that as a bus ines s invite e ab oard th e ins ure d waterc raf t whe n injur ed, he is enti tled to med i cal pay m ent s as refere nced in Secti on D, reinf orci ng t hat he is a n int ende d ins ured or th ird‑ part y bene fic iary. 20 He ha s not rec ei ved an y med ica l payme nts to da te. 21 5. Volpi fur ther n otes that p asse nger s were re quire d to e xec ute a polic y‑re late d wai ver. 22 Prior to embarka tion o r boa rding or p articipa ting in an y renta l act ivit y, the r ente r and e ach pa ss enger will be requir ed to si gn t he ap propr iate BO AT RENTAL RELEA SE (herei nafter “Rel ease”) f orm pro vided by you and agreed up on b y us. In t he e vent a pa sse nger is le ss tha n 18 year s of age, his or her par ent or (a dult) lega l gua rdia n must si gn the appr opr iate Releas e where al lowe d by sta te law. 23 19 Pl.’s. Res p. to M TD a t 4 - 5., Ex. A at 8. 20 Pl.’s. Resp. to M TD at 5. 21 Id. 22 Com pl. at ¶ 11. 23 Id.

6 He sta tes t hat We stp ort’s de nia l turn s on the Mari na’s fa ilure to ob tain su ch a waive r. 24 West port d oes not ad dress th is argu ment or the waive r in their brief ing. 6. Westp ort frame s the decla rato ry jud gmen t as an im perm issib le direc t actio n and see ks dism issa l. West port a rgue s tha t unde r Rod riguez v. Grea t Ame rica n Insura nce C o., 25 an inj ured pla int iff la cks s tandin g to bri ng a direc t acti on aga ins t a tortf easo r’s in sure r, sub jec t only t o thre e exce ption s — assi gnmen t, in tend ed th ird‑p art y bene fici ary, or s ubro gatio n — none of whic h, West port sa ys, ap pl y here. 26 Westpor t maint ains t hat the M arina is th e insur ed, not V olpi, and tha t Vo lpi’ s sta tus as a pa sse nger or bu sine ss i nvite e does not c onfe r ins ured s tatu s or thir d‑par ty be nef iciar y ri ght s. 27 7. A motio n to dism iss for fail ure to sta te a c laim p ursu ant t o Super ior C ourt R ule 12(b)(6) wi ll no t be g ranted if the “pla int iff ma y rec over under a ny rea sona bly conce ivable set of c ircum stan ces s usce pti ble of pro of under th e comp lain t.” 28 The Cour t' s revi ew is l imite d to t he wel l - ple d allega tio ns in t he com plai nt. 29 In ruling o n a 12(b)(6) mot ion, t he Cour t “mus t 24 Pl.’s. Resp. to M TD at 4 -5. 25 2022 W L 59 1762, at *7 (De l. Supe r. Fe b. 23, 202 2). 26 Def. ’s M TD at 3. 27 Def. ’s Reply to the MTD, D.I. 12 at 2. 28 Brown e v. Robb, 58 3 A.2 d 949, 950 (Del. 19 90). 29 Doe v. C ahi ll, 884 A.2d 45 1, 458 (Del. 2005).

7 draw a ll reas onab le fac tual inf ere nce s in favor of the pa rt y oppos ing t he moti on.” 30 Dism issa l is wa rra nted “only if it appea rs wi th reas onab le cert ainty that th e plain tiff could not prov e any set o f facts th at would e ntitle him to rel ief.” 31 Howe ver, t he Cour t wi ll “i gnore c onc lusor y a llegat ions t ha t lack spe cif ic sup port ing fac tua l alleg atio ns.” 32 The Cour t ma y, “de sp it e alleg ations to the contrary,” dis miss a comp laint “ where th e unambig uous lang uage of docum e nts upo n wh ich th e cla ims are bas ed con trad ict the compl aint' s a llega tio ns.” 33 8. Thi s Court h as the d iscr eti on to iss ue a dec lara tory j udg ment prov ided t he ca se inv olves an “ac tual c ont rovers y.” 34 Four elem ents ne ed t o be sat isfie d in o rder to de term ine a n actua l c ontr overs y is presen t: (1) It mu st be a contr overs y inv olv ing the rights or othe r lega l rela tions of the par ty see kin g decla rator y reli ef; (2) it must be a contr over sy i n wh ich the cl aim o f r ight o r othe r l egal inte rest is asser ted ag ain st one wh o has an i nter est in c onte sting t he cla im; (3) the cont rover sy mus t be be twee n part ies wh ose in tere sts ar e 30 Id. 31 Id. 32 Ramunno v. Ca wley, 705 A. 2d 1 029, 1 0345 (Del. 1998). 33 Tigan i v. C. I.P. Assoc s., LL C, 2020 WL 2037241, at *2 (Del. Apr. 27, 2020) (cit ing Malp iede v. Towns on, 780 A.2 d 1075, 1083 (Del. 2001)). 34 XL Sp ecialty Ins. Co. v. WMI Liq uidat ing Trust, 93 A.3d 1208, 1216 (Del. 2014).

8 real a nd ad verse; a nd (4) t he is sue i nvo lve d in the co ntro vers y must be ripe for j udi cial deter mi nati on. 35 West port’ s argu me nt cent ers ar oun d Vo lpi not b ein g able t o meet t he f irs t eleme nt bec ause the r ight s at is sue are the rig hts of t he Mar ina a nd Si nger, not his own. 36 Beca use of th is, West port c laim s Vol pi lacks st andi ng. 37 9. Delawa re law ge nera lly pro hibi ts an inj ured thi rd par ty from brin ging a di rect ac tion ag ains t a tor tfeaso r’s lia bil ity ins urer, because cou rts “do not wa nt an ins urer to be pr eju dice d by a jury’ s tende ncy to fi nd the insur ed ne gli gent or infl ate da mage s ba sed up on an i nsu rers deep p ocket s.” 38 There are exceptions to this pr ohibi tio n for a v alid a ssi gnme nt, i nte nde d thir d‑par ty be nefi ciar y s tatu s, or subr ogat ion. 39 10. Here, V olp i does n ot allege an ass ignm ent or su brog atio n. 40 He does, howeve r, al lege that he is a n in tend ed ins ured on the poli cy or f alls unde r the third‑ part y benefic iar y exce ptio n. 41 The co mplaint and opp osition 35 In re COVID - Relate d Res tric tio ns on Re lig iou s Serv ices, 326 A.3d 62 6, 642 - 43 (Del. 20 24) (qu oting Rol lins In t'l v. I nt'l Hy dron ics C orp., 303 A.2 d 660, 662 - 63 (De l. 1 973)). 36 Def. ’s M TD at 3. 37 Id. 38 Rodrig uez, 2022 W L 59 1762, at *5 (Del. Sup er. F eb. 23, 20 22) (in ter nal citati on o mitted). 39 Id. 40 See Pl. ’s resp. to MTD at 4. 41 Id.

9 reference polic y terms su ppor ting th is ass erti on: Cover age A an d Sect ion D. 42 Throug h thes e sectio ns of th e polic y, Volpi suff icie ntl y pled t hat he is inte nded to be a n insure d on the p olic y or a third part y benef ici ary. Westpo rt does not a ddre ss e ithe r sec tion of th e po licy and m ake s no a rgu ment as t o w hy those secti ons d o not conf er ins ure d or thir d - part y bene fic iary st atus o n Volp i. 11. Drawin g all r eason able inf ere nce s in fav or of V olpi a nd acce ptin g fact s as tru e, i t is r easo nabl y co ncei vable tha t Vo lpi was a n i nsure d or inte nded be nef ici ary unde r the Ma rin a’s ins ura nce pol icy. Volpi has suffic ie ntly prese nte d pr oof u nder the c ompla int tha t the policy expressl y or impl iedl y ide ntif ies p assen gers a s ins ure ds or i nten ded be nefic ia ries. 12. Under the se circ um stance s, t he Cour t co nclu des tha t disc ove ry and fur the r proce ed ings wi ll be ne ces sary t o eva luat e whet her W estp ort an d the M arina inte nde d passe nger s of t heir vesse ls to have thir d par ty be nef iciar y righ ts, if pas seng ers were i nten ded ins ure ds unde r the poli cy, o r if passe nger s have n o ri ghts unde r the poli cy. D ismi ssal at th is junc ture wo uld be pr emat ure where plai ntiff has ple d fac ts tha t, if pr oven, cou ld bri ng him withi n the inte nded thir d‑par ty benef icia ry ex ception or as an int ende d in sured on the polic y. 42 Id.

10 13. The stay of the u nderl yin g tort ac tio n miti gate s con cern s under lyi ng the proh ibiti on o n direc t act ions, as no jur y in t he tor t case will lear n tha t a sou rce of ins ura nce exi sts. 14. For the for eg oing r eason s, Def enda nt W estpor t Insura nc e Corpor at ion’ s Mot ion to D ismi ss u nder Rule 1 2(b) (1) a nd 12(b)(6) is DENIE D. IT IS SO ORDE RE D. /s/ Ferris W. Wharton Ferris W. Whar ton, J.