Avemco Ins. Co. v. Mock, 14841-9-I

• Decision Date: 14 July 1986
• Docket Number: No. 14841-9-I,14841-9-I
• Citation: 721 P.2d 34,44 Wn.App. 327
• Parties: AVEMCO INSURANCE COMPANY, a foreign corporation, Respondent, v. Thomas E. MOCK and Karen A. Mock, husband and wife, Doug Fox Travel, Inc., a Washington corporation, Associated Aviation Underwriters, a foreign corporation, Flightcraft, Inc., a Washington corporation, Appellants, Flying Tiger Employee Credit Union, Defendant.
• Court: Washington Court of Appeals

Page 327

44 Wn.App. 327

721 P.2d 34

AVEMCO INSURANCE COMPANY, a foreign corporation, Respondent, v. Thomas E. MOCK and Karen A. Mock, husband and wife, Doug Fox Travel, Inc., a Washington corporation, Associated Aviation Underwriters, a foreign corporation, Flightcraft, Inc., a Washington corporation, Appellants Flying Tiger Employee Credit Union, Defendant.

No. 14841-9-I.

Court of Appeals of Washington,

Division I.

July 14, 1986.

William E. Gibbs, Seattle, for Avemco Ins. Co.

Bruce F. Meyers, Mercer Island, Dennis H. Walters, Karr, Tuttle, Koch, Mawer & Morrow, P.S., Lawrence B. Bailey, Shidler, McBroom & Gates, Seattle, for Thomas E. Mock.

WILLIAMS, Judge.

Avemco Insurance Company brought this action against Thomas and Karen Mock, Doug Fox Travel, Inc., Associated Aviation Underwriters and Flightcraft, Inc. for a declaratory judgment that damage to Mock's airplane and Doug Fox's airplane was not covered by the Avemco aircraft insurance policy issued to Mock. The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of Avemco, determining that an exclusionary clause in Mock's policy applied. Mock, Doug Fox, Associated and Flightcraft appeal.

Thomas Mock, a licensed pilot, flew his airplane into Boeing Field and parked it without chocking the wheels or tying it down. He returned approximately 10 minutes later, entered the cockpit, and attempted to start the engine, which would not start because the battery was weak. After making sure that the parking brake was set, Mock successfully handpropped the propeller to start the engine. Unfortunately, Mock had left the throttle set at full power and no one was seated at the controls when the engine started. The propulsion of the engine at full throttle overrode the parking brake, and the airplane rolled forward. Mock ran around the wing of the airplane, jumped into the cockpit immediately before or just as the airplane commenced to move and attempted to stop it by retarding the throttle, but was unsuccessful. He also applied full pressure on the toe brakes. Notwithstanding these efforts, the airplane rolled approximately 91 feet, colliding with an airplane owned by Doug Fox, leased to Flightcraft and insured by Associated. Approximately 18 to 20 seconds elapsed from the engine's start to the collision.

Mock's policy with Avemco provided:

EXCLUSIONS APPLYING TO ALL COVERAGES

This Policy does not cover bodily injury, property damage or loss:

* * *

(2) Arising out of:

(a) starting an engine of your insured aircraft unless a pilot or mechanic is seated at the controls; ...

The issue is whether the exclusionary clause in Mock's policy applies. The phrase "arising out of" is unambiguous and has a broader meaning than "caused by" or "resulted from." State Farm Mutual Auto. Ins. Co. v. Centennial Ins. Co., 14 Wash.App. 541, 543, 543 P.2d 645 (1975), review denied, 87 Wash.2d 1003 (1976). It is ordinarily understood to mean "originating from," "having its origin in," "growing out of" or "flowing from." Transport Indemnity Co. v....