Mid-Century Insurance Co. v. Haynes3/8/1990
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, SIXTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
No. H005687
1990.CA.41036 ; 218 Cal. App. 3d 737; 267 Cal. Rptr. 248
March 8, 1990
MID-CENTURY INSURANCE COMPANY, PLAINTIFF AND RESPONDENT,
v.
LORETTA HAYNES, DEFENDANT AND APPELLANT
Superior Court of Santa Cruz County, No. 105900, John A. Marlo, Judge.
Hal F. Seibert for Defendant and Appellant.
Ralph E. Mendell and Campbell, Warburton, Britton, Fitzsimmons & Smith for Plaintiff and Respondent.
Opinion by Cottle, J., with Premo, Acting P. J., and Elia, J., concurring.
Cottle
In the trial of this declaratory relief action, the court, sitting without a jury, determined that plaintiff Mid-Century Insurance Company (hereafter Mid-Century) had no obligation to defend or indemnify defendant Bruce Martin, a permissive user of Mid-Century's insured's automobile, for personal injury damages in excess of $15,000, notwithstanding coverage of $100,000 to the named insured. The sole issue on appeal is whether Insurance Code section 11580.1, subdivision (a), authorizes an insurer to limit the insurance for permissive users to the limits set forth in Vehicle Code section 16056, subdivision (a), in situations where the named insured has obtained coverage in excess of the limits. We conclude that it does. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment in favor of insurer.
Facts
The parties submitted the matter to the trial court on the following stipulated facts: "1. On 5/23/86 Farmers Insurance had in effect their
automobile insurance policy # No. 120055045, naming Jowenna Surber as a named insured. A copy of that policy is attached hereto as exhibit 'A'. Under said policy, a 1979 Mercedes vehicle, owned by Jowenna Surber was an insured vehicle under that policy. [para.] 2. On or about May 23, 1986, Bruce Martin was driving the aforementioned vehicle owned by Jowenna Surber with her consent and permission, and was a permissive user of the Surber vehicle. [para.] 3. On May 23, 1986, Bruce Martin was not an agent or an employee of Jowenna Surber, nor was he related to her by blood, marriage, or adoption, nor was he a resident of her household. [para.] 4. Jowenna Surber was not negligent in allowing Bruce Martin to operate her vehicle. [para.] 5. On May 23, 1986, Bruce Martin was negligent in his operation of the Surber vehicle, which negligence resulted in a collision, and proximately caused injuries to Loretta Haynes. [para.] 6. Neither at the time the policy was written nor at the time of the accident, was Jowenna Surber in the business of leasing , selling, repairing, servicing, delivering, testing, road testing, parking or storing automobiles. [para.] 7. Neither at the time of the accident, nor at the time the policy was written, was Bruce Martin referred to by name in the policy as a person having any specific coverage or limitation of coverage under the policy. [para.] 8. Bruce Martin's rights in said policy have been assigned to Loretta Haynes." (Upper case designation of parties eliminated.)
The "E-Z Reader Car Policy," attached to the stipulated facts as exhibit "A," defined "insured person" under "Part I - Liability" as: "1. You or any family member. [para.] 2. Any person using your insured car. [para.] 3. [A third category not relevant here.]" (Italics omitted.) In the same "Part I
Page 1 2 3 4 California Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|