Farmers Ins. of Columbus, Inc. v. Taylor, 87AP-418

Decision Date29 September 1987
Docket NumberNo. 87AP-418,87AP-418
Citation528 N.E.2d 968,39 Ohio App.3d 68
PartiesFARMERS INSURANCE OF COLUMBUS, INC., Appellant, v. TAYLOR, et al., Appellees. *
CourtOhio Court of Appeals

Syllabus by the Court

Where a policy of insurance providing uninsured motorist coverage does not define the term, "a resident of your household," a minor who lives a majority of the time with her mother and regularly for some duration with her father is a resident of both households. A "resident of your household" refers to one who lives in the home of the named insured for a period of some duration or regularity, although not necessarily there permanently, but excludes a temporary or transient visitor.

Crabbe, Brown, Jones, Potts & Schmidt, David J. Richards and Jeffrey L. Kohn, Columbus, for appellant.

Ronald E. Plymale Co., L.P.A., and Amy T. Wood, Columbus, for appellees.

WHITESIDE, Judge.

Plaintiff, Farmers Insurance Company of Columbus, Inc., appeals from a judgment of the Franklin County Court of Common Pleas finding defendant Toni Taylor, a minor, to be an insured under the uninsured motorist coverage of an insurance policy issued by plaintiff to her father, defendant Jerry Taylor. In support of its appeal, plaintiff has raised what it terms assignments of error, but are actually statements of the law plaintiff contends the trial court should have declared, as follows:

"I. A child is a 'resident family member' of the house where she lives the majority of the time and where she attends school despite occasional, or even frequent, visits to another home.

"II. Ohio does not recognize the concept of 'dual residency.'

"III. Toni Taylor was not a resident of the home of Jerry Taylor at the time of the accident."

Defendant Toni Taylor was injured as a result of a collision between an automobile owned and operated by her mother and one operated by an uninsured motorist while returning from a visitation with her father, defendant Jerry Taylor. Defendant Toni Taylor's mother, defendant Joan Stephenson, likewise had no automobile insurance and, thus, was also an uninsured motorist. The sole question, therefore, is whether defendant Toni Taylor is entitled to uninsured motorist coverage under the policy issued by Farmers Insurance Company of Columbus to her father, defendant Jerry Taylor. The common pleas court found defendant Toni Taylor to be covered by the uninsured motorist coverage of plaintiff's policy because defendant Toni Taylor was a resident of her father's home under the policy definitions.

Defendant Toni Taylor lived primarily with her mother but also spent time with her father on weekends and in the summer. As the trial court found, the evidence indicated that defendant Toni Taylor lived with her mother approximately two-hundred days of the year and lived with her father between one hundred sixty-two and one hundred seventy-two days of the year.

Plaintiff's policy defined "insured person" under the uninsured motorist coverage as follows:

"Insured person means:

"a. You or a family member.

"b. Any other person while occupying your insured car.

"c. Any person for damages that person is entitled to recover because of bodily injury to you, a family member, or another occupant of your insured car.

"But, no person shall be considered an insured person if the person uses a vehicle without having sufficient reason to believe that the use is with permission of the owner."

Accordingly, defendant Toni Taylor is an insured person under that definition if she bears the relationship to her father of family member. "Family member" is defined in the policy as follows:

"Family Member means a person related to you by blood, marriage or adoption who is a resident of your household, including a ward or foster child."

Unfortunately, the policy does not define what it means by "resident of your household." However, defendant Toni Taylor, if a resident of her father's household, is an insured person under the uninsured motorist coverage since it is conceded that she is related to her father by blood. The trial court found that defendant Toni Taylor was a resident of her father's household for between one hundred sixty-two and one hundred seventy-two days of the year, although not consecutive days. Likewise, she was a resident of her mother's household for the remaining approximately two-hundred days of the year.

Plaintiff contends that, with respect to insurance...

To continue reading

Request your trial
67 cases
  • Gibbons v. Shalodi
    • United States
    • Ohio Court of Appeals
    • June 7, 2021
    ...although not necessarily there permanently, but excludes a temporary or transient visitor." Farmers Ins. of Columbus, Inc. v. Taylor , 39 Ohio App.3d 68, 70, 528 N.E.2d 968 (10th Dist.1987) ; Flynn v. State Farm Mut. Auto., Ins. Co. , 554 Fed.Appx. 430, 434-435 (6th Cir. 2014), fn. 5 (colle......
  • Am. States Ins. Co. v. Guillermin
    • United States
    • Ohio Court of Appeals
    • January 17, 1996
    ...regularity, although not necessarily there permanently, but excludes a temporary or transient visitor." Farmers Ins. of Columbus, Inc. v. Taylor (1987), 39 Ohio App.3d 68, 528 N.E.2d 968, syllabus. The Shear court also stressed the nontemporary nature of the domestic living arrangements as ......
  • American States Ins. Co. v. Alverda Guillermin, 96-LW-0045
    • United States
    • Ohio Court of Appeals
    • January 17, 1996
    ...v. Lightning Rod Mut. Ins. Co. (1991), 72 Ohio App.3d 708, 710-11, the primary consideration is the nontemporary nature, Shear, supra; Taylor, supra; v. Banks (1969), 19 Ohio App.2d 152, 156, or regularity, Bunch v. Nationwide Mut. Ins. Co. (Jan. 11, 1983), Montgomery App. No. 7897, unrepor......
  • Tokley v. State Farm Ins. Companies
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of South Dakota
    • January 28, 1992
    ...by those cases are useful in determining whether Peter may be said to have lived with his father.2 In Farmers Ins. Co. of Columbus v. Taylor, 39 Ohio App.3d 68, 528 N.E.2d 968 (1987), the court found a child to be an insured resident of a non-custodial parent's home where the child spent a ......
  • 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