Clinger v. U.S. Fire Ins. Co., 71--480
| Decision Date | 06 February 1973 |
| Docket Number | No. 71--480,71--480 |
| Citation | 506 P.2d 390,32 Colo.App. 52 |
| Parties | Grace CLINGER, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant-Appellee. . II |
| Court | Colorado Court of Appeals |
Jacob H. Chisen, Denver, Walberg & Pryor, John Walberg, Denver, for plaintiff-appellant.
Zarlengo, Mott & Carlin, Reed L. Winbourn, David Scheibach, Denver, for defendant-appellee.
Appellant Grace Clinger was issued an insurance policy by appellee United States Fire Insurance Company, insuring against certain losses with respect to automobiles held by her for resale. Following a loss to one of the cars, Clinger sought recovery under the policy. The insurance company denied coverage and Clinger instituted this action. After a trial to the court, judgment was entered dismissing the action. Clinger appeals from that judgment. We affirm.
Facts are undisputed. Clinger is a school teacher in Loveland, Colorado. As a sideline she sells Amphicars, vehicles which are equipped to travel on land and water, selling three or four cars a year. Her inventory consists of three to five cars. Clinger does not employ any salesmen or mechanics, and handles the business of buying and selling the cars by herself. When she started selling Amphicars, in 1963, Clinger purchased an insurance policy from defendant insurance company which insured against direct loss to the Amphicars caused by,
'(B) Windstorm (and) Launching operations, including Marine perils while on the water for demonstrations, trial, or sinking, . . . or overturn.'
The policy also stated,
While one of Clinger's cars was being demonstrated on a reservoir in Pueblo, Colorado, a sudden squall came up and the Amphicar was swamped and sank. The insurance company admits that the car and loss were both covered under the policy but that the man conducting the demonstration, Mr. Schneider, was not a 'qualified employee' of the assured, and therefore, under paragraph 7 quoted above, the policy was void as to this loss.
The facts pertinent to this issue, again undisputed, are that Schneider was an insurance salesman who travelled extensively around the state. About five years prior to the loss he became acquainted with Clinger when he was given a demonstration of an Amphicar. During the succeeding years, Schneider and his boss received several demonstration rides, during which Schneider, at times, drove the car. Following one of the early demonstrations Clinger gave them pictures of the Amphicar and told them that if they found a prospect for the purchase of a car and she sold one to the prospect she would 'give them what was fair, some kind of a commission--what was fair.'
In August 1968, Schneider advised Clinger that he was going to be in Pueblo for about a week selling insurance, and would like to have an Amphicar to demonstrate to a prospect there. Clinger agreed, had a car put in shape, took Schneider on a refresher trip, reviewed the procedures for preparing the car for water use, gave him twenty-five dollars for costs, and turned the car over to him to use for the trip and demonstration....
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Gulf Ins. Co. v. State
...policy term is not specifically defined by the policy, the word retains its ordinary customary meaning. Clinger v. United States Fire Insurance Co., 32 Colo.App. 52, 506 P.2d 390 (1973). Applying those principles here, we conclude that Coverage A affords general coverage for bodily injury r......