Buxton v. Midwestern Ins. Co.
Decision Date | 11 January 1952 |
Docket Number | Civ. A. No. 3434. |
Parties | BUXTON v. MIDWESTERN INS. CO. et al. |
Court | U.S. District Court — Western District of Louisiana |
COPYRIGHT MATERIAL OMITTED
Nathan A. Cormie and Carmouche, Martin & Wilson, all of Lake Charles, La., for plaintiff.
Plauche & Stockwell, Lake Charles, La., for Midwestern Ins. Co.
Thompson, Lawes, Cavanaugh & Hickman, Lake Charles, La., for Pacific Employers Ins. Co.
Plaintiff, a Louisiana citizen, sues for $66,300.00, plus interest and costs, for personal injuries sustained on July 20, 1951, when a 1950 Chevrolet coach automobile, owned and then being driven by Richard A. Parker and insured by Midwestern Insurance Company (hereafter called Midwestern), an Illinois corporation, in which she was a guest, was involved in a collision on a Louisiana highway (U. S. 90), near Lake Charles, Louisiana, with a 1949 Ford coach automobile, owned by Houston Oil Field Material Company, Inc. (hereafter called Houston), a Delaware corporation, then being driven by one B. R. Nelson with Houston's permission and insured by Pacific Employers Insurance Company (hereafter called Pacific), a California corporation.
The defendants, Midwestern and Pacific, non-resident insurance companies, authorized to transact insurance business in this State,1 were served and cited through the Secretary of State of Louisiana, on September 27, 1951, as public liability insurers of the two automobiles.
This Court, therefore, has jurisdiction; there is diversity and the requisite amount. 28 U.S.C. § 1332, 28 U.S.C.A. § 1332.
Pacific moved to dismiss the complaint and for a summary judgment, based on identical grounds, hereinafter set forth, which is the issue now before us. The uncontroverted and admitted facts, necessary to the disposition of the motion for summary judgment — besides those hereinabove stated —, are these.
Effective January 1, 1951, for over $12,000.00 worth of premiums,2 Pacific issued and delivered its policy of comprehensive automobile liability insurance to Houston3 and Houston Oil Field Material Company, Inc. of California (hereafter called Houston, et al.) in Houston, in the State of Texas, with limits of $150,000/300,000 bodily injury and $10,000 property damage. The policy (a copy of which Pacific filed in the record) applies to accidents which occur within the United States, its territories or possessions. Canada or Newfoundland and while the automobiles are being transported between ports thereof. An endorsement (No. 7) extends it to accidents within certain distances in the Republic of Mexico.4
Schedule B-1 of the policy lists 37 automobiles and 7 trucks with Louisiana as being the . Then premiums are charged for coverage of "Hired Automobiles", if any, in Louisiana; as also for "Non-Owned Automobiles" and it appears six of these give Louisiana addresses.
There is an "Endorsement No. 8 for Motor Carrier Policies of Insurance for Bodily Injury Liability, and Property Damage Liability, under Section 4 of Act No. 301 of the Louisiana Legislature of 1938 LSA-R.S. 45:163".
We quote further the following pertinent provisions of the policy:
* * * * * *
* * * * * *
This latter provision (No. 12) is the "no action clause".
Pacific contends that, since its policy was issued and delivered in the State of Texas, where a "no action clause" in a policy is valid and enforceable, the Louisiana law permitting direct action against the insurer is not applicable; that, alternatively, if the Louisiana law is applied, as to Pacific that law would be unconstitutional in that: it would impair the obligations of the insurance contract, Art. I, Sec. 10, U.S. Const.; Art. 4, § 15, La.Const. of 1921; it would violate the Full Faith and Credit Clause, Art. IV, Sec. 1, U.S.Const.; and it would deny due process and equal protection of the laws. Amendment XIV, Sec. 1, U.S.Const.
The pertinent Louisiana statutes, in force at the time of the delivery and issuance of Pacific's policy, at the time of the accident, at the time of the filing of this complaint, and now, provide as follows:
La. Act No. 541 of 1950, LSA-R.S. 22:655. (Emphasis supplied.)
"Section 1. Be it enacted by the Legislature of Louisiana that Section 983 of Title 22, Louisiana Revised Statutes of 1950 is hereby amended to add after Subsection "D" a new subsection to be captioned subsection "E" and to read as follows:
...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Lewis v. Manufacturers Casualty Ins. Co.
...been held constitutional as a proper and permissible regulation of the business of insurance in this State. See, Buxton v. Midwestern Ins. Co., D.C., 102 F.Supp. 500, 5013; cf. Fisher v. Home Indemnity Company, 5 Cir., 1952, 198 F.2d 218, 2194; Cushing v. Maryland Casualty Company, 5 Cir., ......
-
Roberts v. Home Ins. Indem. Co.
...but for the protection of the public.' (Davies v. Consolidated Underwriters (1942) 199 La. 459, 6 So.2d 351; see Buxton v. Midwestern Ins. Co. (W.D.La.1952) 102 F.Supp. 500.) California Insurance Code section 11580, requiring that insurance policies issued in California allow a direct actio......
-
McDowell v. National Sur. Corp.
...of the State wherein this policy is issued are hereby amended to conform to such statutes.' In this connection, in Buxton v. Midwestern Ins. Co., D.C., 102 F.Supp. 500, 507, the court said that the insurer in return for the privilege of doing business, had consented to the direct action. 'I......
-
Theye Y Ajuria v. Pan Am. Life Ins. Co.
...judgment of the District Court is reversed and plaintiff's suit is dismissed at his costs. Reversed and rendered. 1 Buxton v. Mid-Western Insurance Co., D.C., 102 F.Supp. 500; Lewis v. Manufacturers Casualty Insurance Company, D.C., 107 F.Supp. 465; Boring et al. v. Louisiana State Insuranc......