Lynam v. EMPLOYERS'LIABILITY ASSURANCE CORP., 14489.
| Decision Date | 24 April 1964 |
| Docket Number | No. 14489.,14489. |
| Citation | 331 F.2d 757 |
| Parties | William T. LYNAM, III, Ancillary Administrator of the Estate of William C. Bunting, Appellant, v. The EMPLOYERS' LIABILITY ASSURANCE CORPORATION, Limited, a British Corporation. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Third Circuit |
William T. Lynam, III (Wilson & Lynam, Wilmington, Del., on the brief), for appellant.
Herbert L. Cobin, Wilmington, Del., for appellee.
Before STALEY, GANEY and SMITH, Circuit Judges.
This is an action for a declaratory judgment to determine the rights of William T. Lynam, III, Ancillary Administrator of the Estate of William C. Bunting. The application is for the deciding by the court of whether or not the defendant is liable on a policy of automobile insurance issued to Hunter M. Martin on August 25, 1956, insuring a 1955 Chevrolet truck.
Hunter M. Martin, after the policy was issued, converted the truck into a tractor unit to tow a 1941 Baker trailer, which trailer was separately registered as an independent vehicle in the name of Hunter M. Martin, in the Motor Vehicle Division of Virginia on October 8, 1956. After the issuance of the policy, the converted truck and attached trailer were operated by Franklin A. Martin with permission of the named insured and, while moving backward, came in contact with Bunting, causing him personal injuries. The accident happened on November 29, 1956, and it was stipulated that prior to that time the defendant was not given any notice of change in the vehicle. Martin notified his insurer of the accident and the defendant-insurer, after investigation, cancelled the policy on December 1, 1956.
On August 30, 1957, William C. Bunting brought suit against Franklin A. Martin and Hunter M. Martin in the Superior Court of New Castle County, Delaware, seeking damages for the injuries he sustained on November 29, 1956. The defendant in this suit, Hunter M. Martin, notified the present defendant-insurer of the pending action and demanded that it defend the same. The defendant-insurer herein refused to so do, claiming that the change in equipment was not covered in the policy and a verdict was rendered in favor of the plaintiff in the sum of $18,000 and this action was then filed under the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 1332, the plaintiff being a citizen of the State of Delaware, and the defendant being a corporation incorporated under the law of Great Britain. The court below...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Luke v. American Family Mutual Insurance Company, 71-1348
...442, 217 A.2d 909, 912-913 (1966); cf. Lynam v. Employers' Liability Assurance Corp., 218 F.Supp. 383, 385 (D.Del.1963), aff'd 331 F.2d 757 (3 Cir. 1964). The ownership of an automobile which is junk or needs major repairs can hardly be thought to be ownership for liability insurance purpos......
-
LaSalle Nat. Ins. Co. v. Popham
...must replace the automobile described in the policy. E.g., Lynam v. Employers' Liab. Assur. Corp. (D.Del.) 218 F.Supp. 383, affirmed (3 Cir.) 331 F.2d 757; Commercial Standard Ins. Co. v. Central Produce Co., (M.D.Tenn.) 42 F.Supp. 31, affirmed sub nom. Central Produce Co. v. Commercial Sta......
-
Ranger Ins. Co. v. Air-Speed, Inc.
...382 U.S. 830, 86 S.Ct. 68, 15 L.Ed.2d 74 (1965); Lynam v. Employers' Liab. Assur. Corp., 218 F.Supp. 383, 385 (D.Del.1963), aff'd, 331 F.2d 757 (3d Cir. 1964); Iowa Natl. Mut. Ins. Co. v. McGhee, 292 F.Supp. 176, 180 (W.D.Va.1968), aff'd, 408 F.2d 4 (4th Cir. 1969); Hames Ready Mix, Inc. v.......
-
Luke v. American Family Mutual Insurance Company
...v. Stevens, 313 F.Supp. 819 (D.C.Hawaii 1970); Lynam v. Employers' Liability Ass. Corp., 218 F.Supp. 383 (D.C.Del.1963), aff'd. 331 F.2d 757 (3rd Cir. 1963); Merchants Mutual Casualty Co. v. Lambert, 90 N.H. 507, 11 A.2d 361, 127 A.L.R. 483 In this case the 1959 Oldsmobile was disabled with......