American Family Mut. Ins. Co. v. Automobile Club Inter-Insurance Exchange
Decision Date | 13 September 1988 |
Docket Number | INTER-INSURANCE,No. WD,WD |
Citation | 757 S.W.2d 304 |
Parties | AMERICAN FAMILY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, Respondent, v. AUTOMOBILE CLUBEXCHANGE, et al., Appellants, State Farm Mutual Auto Insurance Company, Intervenor-Respondent. 39612. |
Court | Missouri Court of Appeals |
Max Von Erdmannsdorff, Kansas City, for appellants Automobile Club Inter-Ins. Exchange, et al.
Paul G. Schepers, William J. Burrell, Kansas City, for respondentAmerican Family Mut. Ins. Co.
Patrick C. Cena, Kansas City, for respondentState Farm Mut. Auto Ins. Co.
Before KENNEDY, C.J., and TURNAGE and BERREY, JJ.
Automobile Club Inter-Insurance Exchange ("AAA") appeals from a declaratory judgment that neither American Family Insurance Company nor State Farm Insurance Company provided liability coverage for Trenton J. McClintock who was involved in an automobile accident in which Stephanie and Kevin Rahija were injured on August 27, 1984.The judgment was based upon a fact finding by a jury verdict (seeRule 87.06;State Farm Fire & Cas. Co. v. Powell, 529 S.W.2d 666(Mo.App.1975)), that Trenton did not "live with" either his father, William Ray McClintock(American Family's insured), or his mother, Glenda Butts(State Farm's insured).The parents were divorced and lived in separate residences.William Ray McClintock had legal custody of Trenton by the terms of the divorce decree.
The judgment is affirmed.
The facts are as follows:
The parties involved in the August 27, 1984, accident were Trenton McClintock and Stephanie and Kevin Rahija.Trenton J. McClintock, 16 years old, was driving an uninsured car which was owned by Richard Townsend.Stephanie Rahija's car collided with the car driven by Trenton McClintock.Stephanie and Kevin Rahija claimed that they were injured as a result.
The Rahijas carried uninsured motorist coverage on their automobile in an insurance policy issued by AAA, and the question in the case is whether Trenton was an "uninsured motorist".AAA contends he was not--that he was covered either by his father's American Family policy or his mother's State Farm policy.The resolution of this question depends in turn upon whether he"lived with" the one or the other.
Trenton's mother and father were divorced in 1975 and each maintained insurance coverage on his or her own automobile.William Ray McClintock, Trenton's father, carried an automobile insurance policy with American Family.Glenda Butts, Trenton's mother, carried an automobile insurance policy with State Farm.Each of the two insurance policies afforded liability coverage to persons other than the named insureds or their spouses including their "relatives" when driving a "non-owned" car.The policies defined a "relative" as a person who is related to the named insureds or their spouses by blood, marriage, or adoption, and who "lives with"(State Farm) or who "lives in the household of"(American Family) the named insureds.
American Family maintained that Trenton McClintock did not "live with" its insured, Trenton's father, William Ray McClintock.State Farm maintained that Trenton did not "live with" its insured, Trenton's mother, Glenda Butts.The specific facts regarding Trenton's residence will be discussed in detail at a later point in this opinion.
At trial, a jury by separate verdicts found that Trenton J. McClintock resided with neither his mother nor his father on August 27, 1984.The trial court in pursuance thereof entered a declaratory judgment in favor of American Family and State Farm.This appeal followed.
AAA raises two points in its appeal.First, it argues that the trial court erred in refusing its proferred instruction that the jury must find that Trenton J. McClintock, "as a matter of law, ... was domiciled, either with his father ... or his mother ..." on August 27, 1984.Secondly, AAA argues that the trial court erred in failing to give a definitional instruction of the term "living with."
AAA's first point is denied.
AAA argues that Trenton J. McClintock, as a matter of law, resided with either his mother or his father.This is not so.While there is a presumption that a child's residence is that of his custodial parent, this does not mean that a minor as a matter of law necessarily lives with one or the other of his parents.SeeJackson v. Shannon County Department of Social Services, 592 S.W.2d 320, 321(Mo.App.1979);see alsoPhelps v. Phelps, 246 S.W.2d 838, 845(Mo.App.1952).Residence does not depend upon a legal relationship, although a legal relationship may be a relevant factor in determining residence.Residence depends upon a person's physical location coupled with his intent to remain there for an indefinite period of time.State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company v. McBride, 489 S.W.2d 229, 232(Mo.App.1972);Clarkson v. MFA Mutual Insurance Company, 413 S.W.2d 10, 14(Mo.App.1967).Residence is a question of fact.Countryside Casualty Company v. McCormick, 722 S.W.2d 655, 658(Mo.App.1987);Clarkson, 413 S.W.2d at 15.
In reviewing the finding of the jury in a declaratory judgment action, this Court must consider the evidence in the light most favorable to the jury verdict, giving them the benefit of all reasonable inferences and disregarding all contrary evidence.Elliott v. Johnston, 673 S.W.2d 807, 809(Mo.App.1984).
There was sufficient evidence for the jury to find that Trenton McClintock did not reside with his father, William Ray McClintock.Trenton had moved out of his father's home in early August 1984, some three weeks prior to the occurrence of the accident.His possessions had been moved from his father's house to his mother's garage--by his father and his brother, or by himself.At the time of his moving, he had no plans to return in the future and knew that he was not welcome to return.He stated that he stayed "just here and there" for a period of time before attempting to move in with his mother.For a period of time, he lived with his girlfriend, Serena McCormick.His father testified that there were no plans for Trenton to move back in with him.Although William Ray McClintock had legal custody of Trenton, this factor alone does not override the other factors.Thus, the evidence justified the finding that Trenton did not live with his father.
There was sufficient evidence also for the jury to find that Trenton did not reside with his mother, Glenda Butts.Glenda Butts did not have legal custody of Trenton.Mrs. Butts told Trenton when he wanted to move back in with her--after his moving out of his father's house--that he would have to...
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeStart Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

Start Your 7-day Trial
-
Aetna Cas. and Sur. Co. v. Williams
...deemed not resident of either parent's household. Residence held to be a question of fact. American Family Mut. Ins. Co. v. Automobile Club Inter-Insurance Exchange, 757 S.W.2d 304 (Mo.Ct.App.1988). Father held to be non-resident of household, although he still retained title to the house, ......
-
Shelter Mut. Ins. Co. v. Hill
...722 S.W.2d 655, 658 (Mo. App. S.D. 1987) ("The question of residence is one of fact."); Am. Fam. Mut. Ins. Co. v. Auto. Club Inter-Insurance Exch., 757 S.W.2d 304, 306-07 (Mo. App. W.D. 1988) (affirming jury finding that 16-year old son of divorced parents did not "live in the household of"......
-
Ballinger v. Gascosage Elec. Co-op., 72068
...are kindred in characteristic and are governed by the same rules of law."Id. at 194.10 American Family Mut. Ins. Co. v. Automobile Inter-Insurance Exch., 757 S.W.2d 304 (Mo.App.1988).11 The jury decided against the plaintiff on his claim that Gascosage was negligent.12 Melchior v. Madesco I......
-
Harper v. Vigilant Ins. Co.
...physical location coupled with his intent to remain there for an indefinite period of time." American Family Mut. Ins. Co. v. Auto. Club Inter-Ins. Exch., 757 S.W.2d 304, 306 (Mo.Ct.App.1988). 10. John lived at the St. Louis address with his mother and father until his parents' separation a......
-
Section 5.3 We will pay on behalf of an insured . . .
...residence for purposes of a policy covering relatives living with the insured. Am. Family Mut. Ins. Co. v. Auto. Club Inter-Ins. Exch., 757 S.W.2d 304 (Mo. App. W.D. 1988). The question of where a person “resides” is one of fact and requires a careful case-by-case analysis. See the factors ......
-
Section 27.3 Jurisdiction—Domicile
...appointing one parent as the custodial parent is irrelevant to this inquiry. Am. Family Mut. Ins. Co. v. Auto. Club Inter-Ins. Exch., 757 S.W.2d 304 (Mo. App. W.D. 1988); see In re Marriage of Dooley, 15 S.W.3d 747 (Mo. App. S.D. 2000) (residence is equivalent to domicile, requiring physica......