Madison County Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Goodpasture

Decision Date24 November 1971
Docket NumberNo. 44192,44192
Citation276 N.E.2d 289,49 Ill.2d 555
PartiesMADISON COUNTY MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellee, v. Mary GOODPASTURE, Appellant.
CourtIllinois Supreme Court

Burton C. Bernard and Joseph R. Davidson, Edwardsville, for appellant.

Ross Armbruster, Alton, for appellee.

UNDERWOOD, Chief Justice:

Plaintiff Madison County Mutual Insurance Company (Madison) sought a declaratory judgment to determine whether the uninsured motor vehicle provision of its automobile insurance policy is applicable to claims against the uninsured driver of a named insured's automobile when the named insured is injured while riding as a passenger. The trial court found the provision to be inapplicable, the appellate court reversed (267 N.E.2d 31) and we granted leave to appeal. 46 Ill.2d 593.

There is no dispute as to the facts. On April 11, 1965, defendant Mary Goodpasture was riding as a passenger in her automobile which was being driven by John Wright with her permission. An accident occurred and defendant suffered personal injuries. The Goodpasture car was insured by Madison, and it is conceded that under the policy provisions the named insured is not entitled to recovery under the liability portion of the policy and the sole issue presented is whether the uninsured motor vehicle coverage applies.

Madison's argument is based on the plain language of the policy. The insuring agreement providing uninsured motor vehicle coverage provides: 'The company will pay all sums which the insured or his legal representative shall be legally entitled to recover as damages from the owner or operator of an uninsured automobile because of bodily injury, sickness or disease, including death resulting therefrom, hereinafter called 'bodily injury', sustained by the insured, caused by accident arising out of the ownership, maintenance or use of such uninsured automobile * * *.' An uninsured automobile is defined in the policy as: '(1) an automobile with respect to the * * * use of which there is * * * no bodily injury * * * insurance policy applicable at the time of the accident * * * or with respect to which there is a bodily injury * * * insurance policy applicable at the time of the accident but the company writing the same denies coverage thereunder; * * * but the term 'uninsured automobile' shall not include: (i) an insured automobile * * *.'

An insured automobile is defined as an automobile 'described in the schedule as an insured automobile to which the bodily injury liability coverage of the (policy) applies; * * *.'

Madison contends that since the car in ...

To continue reading

Request your trial
15 cases
  • Holcomb v. Farmers Ins. Exchange, 73--20
    • United States
    • Arkansas Supreme Court
    • May 21, 1973
    ...of the Illinois Supreme Court in Barnes v. Powell, 49 Ill.2d 449, 275 N.E.2d 377 (1971), and Madison County Automobile Ins. Co. v. Goodpasture, 49 Ill.2d 555, 276 N.E.2d 289 (1971). In overruling McElyea to the extent it conflicted with the opinion rendered, the language in Doxtater is so a......
  • American Universal Ins. Co. v. DelGreco, 13067
    • United States
    • Connecticut Supreme Court
    • September 1, 1987
    ...Couch, supra, § 45:652; see also Madison County Mutual Auto Ins. Co. v. Goodpasture, 130 Ill.App.2d 946, 267 N.E.2d 31, aff'd, 49 Ill.2d 555, 276 N.E.2d 289 (1971). The regulatory language that the plaintiff relies on must be read, therefore, in light of this principle as well as the langua......
  • Mercury Indem. Co. of Illinois v. Kim
    • United States
    • Illinois Supreme Court
    • May 23, 2005
    ...Doxtater [v. State Farm Automobile Insurance Co., 8 Ill.App.3d 547, 290 N.E.2d 284 (1972),] and [Madison County Automobile Insurance Co. v.] Goodpasture [49 Ill.2d 555, 276 N.E.2d 289 (1971),] and from the language of the statute itself that the legislative intent was to provide extensive u......
  • Desaga v. West Bend Mut. Ins. Co.
    • United States
    • United States Appellate Court of Illinois
    • June 15, 2009
    ...(1971)], Doxtater [v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 8 Ill.App.3d 547, 290 N.E.2d 284 (1972)], and [Madison County Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v.] Goodpasture[49 Ill.2d 555, 276 N.E.2d 289 (1971)] and from the language of the statute itself that the legislative intent was to provide extensive unin......
  • 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