Heritage Ins. Co. of America v. Phelan
| Citation | 308 N.E.2d 176,17 Ill.App.3d 443 |
| Decision Date | 30 January 1974 |
| Docket Number | No. 58226,58226 |
| Parties | HERITAGE INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. James PHELAN et al., Defendants-Appellees. |
| Court | United States Appellate Court of Illinois |
Rolland H. Stimson, Chicago, for plaintiff-appellant.
William N. Anthony, Chicago (Isadore M. Bernstein, Chicago, of counsel), for defendants-appellees.
Heritage Insurance Company of America filed its complaint for declaratory judgment against the defendants James Phelan, a minor, by William Phelan, his father and next friend and William Phelan, individually, asking that the court find that James Phelan was not covered under the 'uninsured motorist' provisions of the policy issued to William Phelan. Plaintiff filed its motion for summary judgment. The parties stipulated to relevant facts. The motion was taken on briefs filed by both parties. The court found in favor of the defendant and dismissed the complaint for want of equity.
On appeal, plaintiff raises the following issues:
1. Whether the court erred in denying plaintiff's motion for summary judgment and dismissing its complaint.
2. Whether James Phelan is excluded from the insurance policy of his father by the restrictive endorsement.
3. Whether James Phelan is excluded from the insurance because he was occupying and/or operating his own uninsured motor vehicle within Exclusion (a) Part IV of the policy.
4. Whether James Phelan is excluded from the insurance provided by Part IV of his father's policy because of the existence of a $50,000 public liability policy applicable at the time and place of injury, i.e. the operator of the Enco Service Station, a joint tort-feasor.
5. Whether the Trust Agreement of Part IV is applicable to funds ($6,000) which James Phelan recovered from the Enco Service Station operator, a joint tort-feasor with the motorist who caused the injuries.
6. Whether Exclusion (b) Part IV applies by reason of the settlement of James Phelan with the insurer of the operator of Enco Service Station, a joint tort-feasor.
Heritage Insurance Company issued its automobile liability policy to William Phelan, father of James Phelan, on June 1, 1964. Said policy was in force at the time of the injury complained of. The definition of 'insured' under Part IV(a) is 'the named insured and any relative.' The policy contained the following language in Appendix A.--Restricted Named Operator Endorsement:
Named Insured: WILLIAM PHELAN 5526 S. Massasoit Chicago, Illinois
Effective Date: June 1, 1964 and continuous.
In consideration of the issuance or continuation of the above described policy, it is agreed that the insurance afforded by the policy shall not apply with respect to the following described operator:
James Phelan 5526 S. Massasoit Son, age 17.
On May 28, 1966, the son, James Phelan, drove his own uninsured automobile to work and while en route, stopped for repairs at an Enco Service Station. The attendant frequently interrupted his work on James Phelan's car to wait on other customers. James Phelan was assisting the attendant in performing said work. James Phelan was then struck and injured by a motorist who had no liability insurance. James Phelan, a minor, by his father, filed his demand with the American Arbitration Association under Part IV (Protection Against Uninsured Motorists) of his father's policy with Heritage Insurance Company of America. Heritage denied coverage. Defendant also filed suit for personal injuries (66 L. 20145) against Willard Harris, the Enco Service Station operator, who owned and controlled the site of the accident. Said operator was covered by public liability insurance applicable to the accident here involved. The case came on for trial late in 1971 and was settled for Six Thousand ($6,000) Dollars on a covenant.
Appellant asks that the judgment of the trial court be vacated and judgment entered in its favor, with a finding that there was no uninsured motorist coverage applicable to defendant, James Phelan, or in the alternative, that plaintiff insurance carrier be given credit for defendant's recovery of $6,000 from the insurance carrier of the operator of the Enco Service Station to the extent that plaintiff is found liable under Part IV of its policy.
In the case of Vesely v. Prestige Casualty Co. (1972), 4 Ill.App.3d 726, 281 N.E.2d 724, this court considered the questions of an automobile endorsement which excluded coverage of a named person. In Vesely, the insurance company issued a policy with a restriction similar to the case at bar. The automobile was involved in an accident at a time when it was being driven by the restricted operator. The court said at page 727, 281 N.E.2d at page 725:
The insured vehicle was involved in a collision which occurred when Vesely, who had been driving, stopped the car, left the engine running and went into a package store to purchase liquor. Mr. Justice Schwartz, with Stamos and Leighton concurring, said at pages 728--729, 281 N.E. at page 725:
'Summary judgment was entered in favor of Vesely and the court subsequently found that both plaintiffs were covered by the policy.
'Defendants contend that Vesely had a bad driving record and that Leimgruber had previously been denied insurance due to the high accident frequency of Vesely. The endorsement was therefore an inducement to the defendants to accept the risk, and as such, must be given effect whether Vesely's signature was forged or not.
'The issue on which this case rests is whether Vesely continued to 'operate' the vehicle at the time of the accident, notwithstanding the fact that he had left the automobile to go into a store. The...
To continue reading
Request your trial
- Applewhite v. State
-
Heritage Ins. Co. of America v. Phelan
...endorsement) in the policy was sufficient to exclude James Phelan from the uninsured-motorist coverage of his father's policy. (17 Ill.App.3d 443, 308 N.E.2d 176.) We granted leave to On May 28, 1966, James Phelan, then aged 19, had completed high school and was employed part time at a loca......
-
Dickenson v. Pate
...activities on the part of the driver which are usual and customary to the operation of a motor vehicle." Heritage Ins. Co. of Am. v. Phelan (1974), 17 Ill.App.3d 443, 446-47. In this respect, courts have held that "[a] person need not be inside a vehicle to operate the vehicle." Melchert v.......
-
Republic Ins. Co. v. Haverlah, 12720
...an automobile while engaged in repairs on the vehicle while it was stopped in a service station. Heritage Ins. Co. of America v. Phelan, 17 Ill.App.3d 443, 308 N.E.2d 176 (1974). Other cases from other jurisdictions consistent with the conclusions reached by the authorities already consider......