Kinsale Insurance wants a federal judge to say it’s off the hook for a contractor’s workplace injury claim after a fiery accident at a New Mexico oil site.
On August 18, 2025, Kinsale Insurance Company filed a complaint in the US District Court for the District of New Mexico, asking for a clear answer: does it have to cover Trucking & Contracting Services, LLC, in a lawsuit brought by a worker who says he was badly burned on the job? The case, while still in its early stages, is already drawing attention from insurance professionals who know just how tricky liability coverage can get when contractors and workplace injuries collide.
Here’s what’s at stake. According to Kinsale’s complaint, the story starts back in October 2021, when Juan Carlos Gamboa Leyva says he was sent by TCS to an oil site in Carlsbad, New Mexico. Gamboa claims he was there to inspect a generator for TCS, which was working as a contractor for Mewbourne Oil Company. While he was on the job, the generator exploded, leaving him with serious burns on his arm. Gamboa says TCS never filed a workers’ compensation claim for him and didn’t report the incident to federal safety regulators.
Gamboa sued both Mewbourne and TCS in state court in April 2024, but later dropped his claims against Mewbourne. That left TCS as the lone defendant, facing demands for damages covering pain, medical bills, lost wages, and more.
Now, Kinsale is asking the federal court to step in. The insurer says its policies with TCS - an environmental combined liability policy and an excess liability policy - don’t cover the accident, no matter how you slice it. Kinsale points to two key policy exclusions. First, there’s the employer’s liability exclusion, which says there’s no coverage for injuries to employees while they’re working. Second, there’s an exclusion for independent contractors, which kicks in unless the contractor met several insurance and paperwork requirements. According to Kinsale, Gamboa didn’t meet those requirements - he didn’t have his own insurance with matching limits, didn’t add TCS as an additional insured, and didn’t sign a hold harmless agreement.
The complaint also mentions that TCS’s owner claims Gamboa wasn’t an employee at all, but rather an independent contractor running his own pressure washing business. Gamboa, for his part, says he was paid hourly and got his daily assignments from TCS. It’s a classic dispute over who counts as an employee and who doesn’t - something every insurance professional has seen before.
Kinsale’s position is straightforward: whether Gamboa was an employee or a contractor, the policy exclusions mean there’s no coverage. The insurer also notes that its policies rule out coverage for any obligations under workers’ compensation laws, and that there’s no duty to defend if there’s no coverage in the first place.
At this point, no judge has weighed in on the facts or made any decisions about who’s right. The complaint is just Kinsale’s side of the story, and TCS and Gamboa will get their chance to respond. But the case is already a reminder for insurers and brokers: when it comes to workplace injuries and contractor relationships, the fine print in your policies can make all the difference.
As this case moves through the courts, insurance professionals will be watching closely. The outcome could shape how liability exclusions are enforced and how contractors and their insurers handle risk in high-stakes industries like oil and gas. For now, it’s a waiting game - but one that’s sure to spark plenty of conversation across the industry.
