Anderson v. Life & Cas. Ins. Co. Of Tenn.
| Citation | 147 S.E. 693 |
| Decision Date | 17 April 1929 |
| Docket Number | (No. 357.) |
| Court | United States State Supreme Court of North Carolina |
| Parties | ANDERSON v. LIFE & CASUALTY INS. CO. OF TENNESSEE. |
[Ed. Note.—For other definitions, see Words and Phrases, Third Series, Motor-Driven Car.]
Appeal from Superior Court, Forsyth County; C. C. Lyon, Emergency Judge.
Action by C. L. Anderson, as administrator of the estate of Thomas G. Anderson, deceased, against the Life & Casualty Insurance Company of Tennessee. Judgment of nonsuit was affirmed by the superior court, and plaintiff appeals. Affirmed.
On the 14th of September, 1926, the defendant issued to the plaintiff's intestate a "Travel and Pedestrian Policy." The insuring clauses limit the extent of the insurance as follows:
"Life and Casualty Insurance Company, of Tennessee, hereby insures the person named in said schedule against the result of bodily injuries received during the time this policy is in force, and effected solely by external violent and accidental means strictly in the manner hereafter stated, subject to all the provisions and limitations hereinafter contained, as follows: If the insured be struck or knocked down or run over while walkingor standing on a public highway by a vehicle propelled by steam, cable, electricity, naphtha, gasoline, horse, compressed air, or liquid power, excluding injuries sustained while on a railroad right of way in violation of any statute or of any regulation of the railroad company, or if the insured shall, by the collision of or by any accident to any railroad passenger car or passenger steamship or steamboat, in or on which such insured is traveling as a fare-paying passenger; or, by the collision of or by any accident to any public omnibus, street railway car, taxicab, or automobile stage, which is being driven or operated, at the time, by a licensed driver plying for public hire, and in which such insured is traveling as a fare-paying passenger; or, by the wrecking of a passenger elevator in which the insured is riding as a passenger; or, by the collision of or by any accident to any private horse-drawn vehicle, or motor-driven car in which insured is riding or driving; or, if the insured shall, by being accidentally thrown from any such vehicle or car, suffer any of the specific losses set forth below, the company will pay the sum set opposite such loss."
The case was tried in the Forsyth county court, and judgment of nonsuit was rendered, and, on appeal to the superior court, the judgment of county court was affirmed.
J. M. Wells, Jr., and John C. Wallace, both of Winston-Salem, for appellant.
Manly, Hendren & Womble, of Winston-Salem, for appellee.
The insured was a motorcycle officer in the police department of the city of Winston-Salem, and on August 11, 1927, while riding on his motorcycle, he was injured by its collision with a truck. The injuries he received caused his death on August 15, 1927. The motorcycle was the ordinary two-wheel machine, propelled by gasoline. The question for decision is whether a motorcycle is within the clause, "motor-driven car in which insured is riding or driving."
The appellant contends that the words, "any such vehicle or car, " near the end of the last insuring clause, embrace all the vehicles described in the clause relating to pedestrians, This instruction we think is not permissible. There are two classes of persons for whose benefit the policy was intended: Pedestrians, or persons "walking or standing on a public highway, " and travelers riding or driving in specified vehicles or cars. These two classes are clearly defined. The intestate was insured against the result of bodily injuries caused, while he was walking or standing on a public highway, by being struck or knocked down, or run over by a vehicle propelled by steam, cable, electricity, naphtha, gasoline, horse, compressed air, or liquid power. Persons driving or riding in motor-driven cars are not included in this category. The bodily injuries against which they are insured are...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State ex rel. Life Ins. Co. v. Trimble
...held that a motorcycle is not a `motor-driven car.' [Salo v. North American Acc. Ins. Co. (Mass.), 153 N.E. 557; Anderson v. Life & Casualty Ins. Co., 197 N.C. 72, 147 S.E. 693; Laporte v. North American Acc. Ins. Co., 161 La. 933; Perry v. North American Acc. Ins. Co. (N.J.), 138 Atl. 894.......
-
Cora v. Patterson
...138 A. 894 (1927); Colyer v. North American Accident Ins. Co., 132 Misc. 701, 230 N.Y.S. 473 (1928); Anderson v. Life & Casualty Ins. Co. of Tennessee, 197 N.C. 72, 147 S.E. 693 (1929); Landwehr v. Continental Life Ins. Co., 159 Md. 207, 150 A. 732 (1930); Deardorff v. Continental Life Ins.......
-
Wayne Nat. Bank v. National Bank of La Grange
... ... Wheeler v. F. & T. Ins. Co., supra; Thomas v ... Vonkapff's Ex'rs, 6 Gill & J ... ...
-
Le Croy v. Nationwide Mut. Ins. Co.
...Life Insurance Co., 1930, 225 Mo.App. 1129, 40 S.W.2d 493. Our Court has followed the majority view. Anderson v. Life & Casualty Insurance Co., 197 N.C. 72, 147 S.E. 693. In the Anderson case plaintiff was injured while riding on a motorcycle (without a side car). The insurance policy cover......