Foley Company was the general contractor on a construction site, and All Temp was a subcontractor on the site. Foley and All Temp entered into a construction contract pursuant to which All Temp agreed to name Foley as an additional insured on its liability insurance policy with Scottsdale Insurance Company, its carrier. At the time Foley was added to the Scottsdale policy, Scottsdale’s general agent, MCI, was authorized to issue certificates of insurance with binding authority for Scottsdale, but Scottsdale prohibited MCI from delegating this authority without Scottsdale’s written consent. Despite this prohibition, MCI informed its agent, CLC, that CLC could issue certificates naming general contractors, like Foley, on the All Temp policy, subject to MCI’s approval, as long as doing so did not increase Scottsdale’s risk. CLC subsequently issued a certificate of insurance to Foley. Scottsdale did not learn that CLC had issued the certificate until after Bryant was fatally injured at the Foley construction site. Rather than canceling All Temp’s policy when it learned about the certificate, Scottsdale continued to renew the policy for three years. Subsequently, Bryant’s heirs successfully recovered damages in an action against All Temp and Foley. Foley then sued Scottsdale for indemnification, and Scottsdale sought indemnification from MCI and CLC on the basis that MCI had breached the agency agreement between Scottsdale and MCI when it allowed CLC to issue a certificate of insurance to Foley. MCI and CLC moved for summary judgment against Scottsdale. 

Will MCI and CLC be required to indemnify Scottsdale? On what basis? [Foley Co. v. Scottsdale Insurance Co., 15 P.3d 353 (Kan. App. 2000).]