In plaintiff's action against defendant-insurer seeking a defense on behalf of its insureds in the underlying accident between a trucker and a pedestrian at a construction site, summary judgment and a stipulated judgment that concluded, as a matter of law, that the trucker's insurers did not owe a duty to defend the developer/general contractor/grading contractor under any vicarious liability theory is reversed where: 1) an omnibus clause may make a person or entity that is potentially liable under the peculiar risk doctrine an "uninsured," and thereby entitled to a defense pursuant to the insurance policy; and 2) under the peculiar risk doctrine, one may be held vicariously liable if he hires an independent contractor to do work that is likely to create a peculiar risk of harm to others unless special precautions are taken.