Certain Underwriters at Lloyd’s of London v Bartle

Underwriters filed suit seeking a declaratory judgment that Bartle was not an insured under a policy issued to a company which sold Bartle a computerized navigation display for his experimental home built aircraft. The district court ruled Bartle was not an insured and issued the requested judgment. The panel affirmed. It first held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in refusing to consider evidence which did not comply with the local rules and Bartle’s failure to properly use the e-filing system made the information submitted difficult to use and hard to track down. The panel held Bartle was not an insured under the plain language of the policy as there was no evidence the company had ownership or financial or managerial control over Bartle or the airplane.