Coverage is not the same as defending you. It's likely that the insurance company would deny coverage if you knowingly disregarded standards. Adherence to standards is a common condition of coverage. In most cases, however, the carrier would still provide you with a defense, but reserve the right to deny coverage and make you repay the cost of defense if it was proven that you violated standards. Furthermore, failing to adhere to standards may not be the cause of the injury. You could have 23 students in the water but the decedent could die from a fatal case of myocarditis, or maybe they failed their equipment and it caused them to drown. There are lots of different scenarios. So, yes. I would defend you and, in the course of this defense, I would NOT throw you under a bus with the plaintiff's attorneys. I don't work for the plaintiff. I work for you, even if the insurance company hires me.
---------- Post added November 19th, 2014 at 09:59 PM ----------
Regarding the DeWolf case, I defended Richie Kohler, International Training, Inc. (TDI/SDI) and Lamartek, Inc. (Dive-Rite) in that case.
Richie was, indeed, covered by Willis under his instructor's policy, even though he never provided any instruction to Terry DeWolf. His defense was covered because there was some allegation in each of the multiple complaints (six or eight?) the plaintiff filed that triggered this coverage. I don't remember what the allegation was off the top of my head, and most of the complaints were illegible so it was difficult to tell, but nevertheless Willis stepped up to defend him and Willis hired me.
International Training, Inc., the parent company to TDI/SDI, was later brought in to the suit with the allegation that it provided improper training to Kohler or issued him false credential, and his TDI/SDI credentials allowed him to charter the expedition vessel and mislead DeWolf into going on the Andrea Doria expedition with him because Richie was supposedly not qualified to lead an expedition to the Andrea Doria. These allegations were without merit and they got blown out on summary judgment. Consequently, International Training was dismissed from the case before trial.
Lamartek, Inc. was also brought into the suit in a later complaint. The allegation was that the Dive-Rite Optima rebreather DeWolf was wearing malfunctioned and this somehow led to his death. Lamartek was also dismissed on summary judgment. The court found that the plaintiffs waited until after the expiration of the statute of limitations to sue Lamartek, and there was also no evidence to support the plaintiff's claims that the rebreather malfunctioned. (Interestingly, DeWolf's attorney was working closely with the attorneys representing Wes Skiles' widow, so many of DeWolf's allegations were copied from the Skiles case. The Skiles case could be its own thread here on SB.)
The DeWolf case was tried in Houston, Texas for two weeks in June 2013. Willis stood by Richie and picked up the tab for the defense, as it also did for the appeal. TDI/SDI also stood by Richie, with training Director Sean Harrison traveling to Houston at his company's expense to testify that Richie earned every one of his credentials that SDI and TDI issued to him. In addition, one of the divers on the expedition traveled from Belgium to Houston at his own expense to testify on Richie's behalf.
The jury was out less than an hour before it came back with a question: "Can we hold Terry DeWolf responsible for causing his own death?" None of the plaintiff's theories were accepted, just as the appellate court ruled against every theory the plaintiff raised on appeal. Here is a copy of the decision the appellate court issued yesterday if anybody is interested in reading it:
DeWolf v. Kohler - Court of Appeals Judgment and Opinion - Nov. 18 2014.
