 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. v. Stockley5/24/2005
marks and citations omitted) (citing Chapman v. Lavy, 20 S.W.3d 610, 613 (Mo. App. E.D. 2000), Pauls v. County Commission of Wayne County, 26 S.W.3d 597, 598-99 (Mo. App. S.D. 2000) and Skinner v. Osage County, 822 S.W.2d 437, 441 (Mo. App. E.D. 1991)). S ee also Kleeman v. Kingsley , 88 S.W.3d 521, 523-25 (Mo. App. S.D. 2002); Arrington v. Loehr , 619 S.W.2d 888, 891 (Mo. App. S.D. 1981); State ex rel. Wabash Railway Co. v. Public Service Commission of Missouri , 100 S.W.2d 522, 525-26 (Mo. 1936) (defining "road" or " highway" as " nothing more than a strip of ground set aside, improved, and dedicated to the public for use as a passageway" and finding that passageways in question were public highways because they had been used by the public as roadways for many years, were improved at public expense and possessed all the characteristics of public highways); City of St. Louis v. Bell Place Realty Co. , 168 S.W. 721, 722-23 (Mo. 1914) (term "public highway" in city ordinance included " all kinds of thoroughfares in which the public have a right of way or passage ").
It is undisputed that on the airport tarmac there are roadways--that is, lanes with speed limits and traffic signals painted on the ground--to better organize the flow of traffic in that area. But it is also undisputed that the tarmac is restricted to the public. Only individuals that need to access the area for aircraft support and airline services are permitted access with appropriate clearance. There is a checkpoint at which all persons entering the tarmac must show identification to verify their permission to access the area. One attempting to enter the tarmac without the proper credentials would be taken into police custody and arrested. Although Stockley makes much of the fact, as did the trial court, that numerous people have the proper credentials to access the tarmac, the number of people who use the road is not determinative of its status as a public road. See Faustlin , 99 S.W.3d at 549. U se of the tarmac roadways can hardly be said, even in theory, to be " free and common to all citizens" when only those with a particular need and permission are permitted access to the area. See id. Moreover, the public certainly does not have actual access to the tarmac roadways. See id. A road to which the general public is prohibited from entering unless they are properly credential ed based on their need to be in the area cannot, under the common and usual meaning of the term, be considered a public road.
D. Summary and Disposition
In sum, Stockley did not prove that the tug was a "car" as defined in the policy and, t herefore, did not meet his burden to prove that the policy covered the accident arising from his use of that tug. State Farm was entitled to a declaration of no coverage, and the judgment to the contrary must be reversed.
III. CONCLUSION
The judgment is reversed.
Page 1 2 3 4 Missouri Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|