Ooida Risk Retention Group, Inc. v. Williams No. 08-10381

http://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/08/08-10381-CV0.wpd.pdf

In this case, the Fifth Circuit subdivided issues relating to coverage, and by piecing together a series of sub-holdings was able to deny coverage to the insured.  The insured was a driver who was asleep in the sleeper compartment and his co-driver rolled the truck, killing the insured.  Court held no insurance.  To do so, had to find driver was an "employee" of a sole proprietorship, had to go outside the "8 corners rule" and that the dead man was a co-driver with the driver.

If the court wants to deny coverage, it can more easily do so by using a detailed analysis of small issues and then piece them back together again to "conclude" that the insurance company wins.  This arises from a textual hyper-literalism, which can escape a more common-sense reading of the insurance contract as a whole (which used to be one of the controlling canons of construction).