Blanton v. Nationwide Mut. Ins. Co., 18445

Decision Date06 January 1966
Docket NumberNo. 18445,18445
Citation146 S.E.2d 156,247 S.C. 148
CourtSouth Carolina Supreme Court
PartiesTerrell E. BLANTON, by his General Guardian, Allie C. Perry, Appellant, v. NATIONWIDE MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, Respondent.

Odom Nolen & Foster, James J. Raman, Spartanburg, for appellant.

Butler, Chapman & Parler, Spartanburg, for respondent.

MOSS, Justice:

This action was instituted by Terrell E. Blanton, a minor, by his general guardian, the appellant herein, against Nationwide Mutual Insurance Company, the respondent herein, to recover certain medical expenses under the provisions of a policy of insurance issued by said respondent to Allie C. Perry.

The pertinent provisions of the insuring agreement in the aforesaid policy are as follows:

'1. AUTOMOBILE MEDICAL PAYMENTS

'To pay all reasonable expenses, incurred within one year following the accident, for necessary medical, dental, surgical, ambulance, hospital, professional nursing and funeral services and prosthetic devices, to or for:

(a) each person whose bodily injury or death was accidentally sustained while in or upon, entering or alighting from the described automobile, provided it was, at the time, being used by the Policyholder, by a resident of the same household or by any other person with permission of the Policyholder or his spouse residing in the same household:

(b) the Policyholder, and, while residents of the same household, his spouse and the relatives of either, whose bodily injury or death was accidentally sustained:

(ii) while in or upon, entering or alighting from any other land motor vehicle or trailer except one owned for more than 30 days by the Policyholder or by a member of the same household, provided this coverage shall not apply to any loss covered by I(a) above.'

It is admitted that the respondent had issued to Allie C. Perry an automobile liability policy with a medical endorsement thereon, which provided a coverage of not exceeding the sum of $500.00. Clauses of this type have been said to constitute, in effect, separate accident insurance coverage, and the obligation runs to the injured person, rather than to the person insured against liability, the contract being one of insurance for the benefit of a third person.

It is admitted that Terrell E. Blanton is a son and member of the household of Allie C. Perry and sustained accidental bodily injury on November 9, 1963 while riding a motor scooter which had been owned for four days prior to the accident by Donald Blanton, a son and member of the household of the said Allie C. Perry. The appellant alleges that as a result of his accidental bodily injury he incurred necessary medical expenses in excess of $500.00. He alleges that he is entitled to recover the sum of $500.00 under the terms of the medical endorsement hereinbefore quoted.

The respondent filed an answer containing two defenses. The first defense admitted certain formal allegations of the complaint but denied any liability to the appellant. The second defense admitted that the appellant was injured while riding a motor scooter owned by his brother, Donald Blanton, who was a member of the same household as the appellant and Allie C. Perry, to whom the policy of insurance was issued by the respondent. It was further alleged that for several years prior to November 9, 1963, a motor scooter had been owned and kept by Donald Blanton while a member of the household of Allie C. Perry and said motor scooter had been recently traded for the one being ridden by the appellant at the time of his accident and injury. It is then alleged that the motor scooter being ridden by the appellant at the time of his accident and injury was a replacement of one owned more than thirty days by Donald...

To continue reading

Request your trial
7 cases
  • Heaton v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of South Carolina
    • January 10, 1968
    ...S.C. 133, 139, 142 S.E.2d 869; Johnson v. Wabash Life Ins. Co. (1964) 244 S.C. 95, 99, 135 S.E. 2d 620. 5 Blanton v. Nationwide Mutual Ins. Co. (1966) 247 S.C. 148, 152, 146 S.E.2d 156; Carroway v. Johnson (1965) 245 S.C. 200, 203, 139 S.E.2d 6 Kingman v. Nationwide Mutual Ins. Co. (1964) 2......
  • Desmond v. American Ins. Co., WD
    • United States
    • Missouri Court of Appeals
    • December 26, 1989
    ...policy. The court noted that the contract was one of insurance for the benefit of a third person. Blanton v. Nationwide Mutual Insurance Co., 247 S.C. 148, 146 S.E.2d 156, 157 (S.C.1966). In Nagy v. Lumbermens Mut. Casualty Co., 100 R.I. 734, 219 A.2d 396 (R.I.1966), the issue of standing t......
  • Foundation Reserve Ins. Co. v. Cody
    • United States
    • Texas Court of Appeals
    • July 24, 1970
    ...184, 174 A.2d 4; Sims v. National Casualty Co., La.Ct. of App., 43 So.2d 26. As was said by the court in Blanton v. Nationwide Mutual Ins. Co., 247 S.C. 148, 146 S.E.2d 156 (1966): 'Clauses of this type have been said to constitute, in effect, separate accident insurance coverage and the ob......
  • First Nat. Bank of SC v. United States Fidelity & G. Co.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of South Carolina
    • March 14, 1974
    ...must be taken and understood in their plain, ordinary and popular sense where there is no ambiguity. Blanton v. Nationwide Mut. Ins. Co., 247 S.C. 148, 146 S.E.2d 156 (1966). Further, ambiguous provisions of a policy of insurance are to be construed in favor of the beneficiary. Galloway v. ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT