Mathews v. Bloomfield
| Decision Date | 27 November 1923 |
| Citation | 141 N.E. 494,246 Mass. 510 |
| Parties | MATHEWS v. BLOOMFIELD et al. |
| Court | United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Appeal from Superior Court, Essex County; P. M. Keating, Judge.
Suit in equity by C. Eva Mathews against Meyer Bloomfield and the Travelers' Insurance Company to enforce payment by the insurer under an accident policy of a judgment for personal injuries against the other defendant. Decree in favor of the insurer, and plaintiff appeals. Affirmed.
A. B. Rigney, of Boston, for plaintiff.
L. C. Doyle, of Boston, for defendant Travelers' Ins. Co.
This is a suit in equity to enforce payment of a judgment for personal injuries, recovered by the plaintiff against the defendant Bloomfield through the latter's negligence in the operation of his automobile, from the defendant insurance company which had issued to Bloomfield a policy of accident insurance against losses arising from such injuries. The case was tried before a judge of the superior court who filed a statement of his findings of fact and entered a decree dismissing the bill. The plaintiff's appeal brings the case here.
[1] No evidence being reported, the findings of fact must be accepted as final. The only question to be decided is whether the automobile was at the time the plaintiff received her injuries covered by the accident insurance policy issued to Bloomfield by the insurance company. That policy insured Bloomfield against loss or liability growing out of the operation of the automobile if it was a pleasure car, and not a taxicab, and if it was subject to call from the garage only.
The pertinent facts are that one Bowen drove this automobile for Bloomfield for pleasure parties, and when not so engaged used it as a taxicab for some time before the day of the injury to the plaintiff. A few days before the injury one Louis talked with Bloomfield at his garage about hiring an automobile for a ride and asked for Bowen, who was absent. A little later Bowen, by Bloomfield's direction, went to the shop of Louis and arranged to take the latter and his party for a ride on the following Sunday to a nearby lake. Pursuant to that arrangement Bowen on Sunday morning went to the house of Louis and while there was engaged by another person named Spencer (who was not a member of Louis' family or of the party for which Louis had arranged the ride) to take him and his companions for a ride after returning from the trip to the lake with Louis and his party. Bowen did...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Ranger Ins. Co. v. Air-Speed, Inc.
...defendants has sustained his (its) burden of proving coverage under the provisions relied on by him (it). Compare Mathews v. Bloomfield, 246 Mass. 510, 512, 141 N.E. 494 (1923); Silva v. Fid. & Cas. Co., 252 Mass. 328, 330, 147 N.E. 858 (1925); Salo v. North Am. Acc. Ins. Co., 257 Mass. 303......
-
Miller v. United States Fidelity & Casualty Co.
... ... not already determined in the original action. There are a ... number of cases of that type such as Mathews v ... Bloomfield, 246 Mass. 510, 141 N.E. 494; Lunt v ... Aetna Life Ins. Co. of Hartford, 261 Mass. 469, 159 N.E ... 461, and Kana v. Fishman, ... ...
-
Farber v. Mut. Life Ins. Co. of New York
...as meaning something different from what the parties intended as expressed by the language they saw fit to employ. Mathews v. Bloomfield, 246 Mass. 510, 512, 141 N. E. 494;Van Bokkelen v. Travelers' Ins. Co., 167 N. Y. 590, 60 N. E. 1121;Imperial Fire Ins. Co. v. Coos County, 151 U. S. 452,......
-
Maryland Casualty Co. v. Adams
... ... 5 Couch ... on Insurance, sec. 1175D, page 4187; Matthews v ... Bloomfield, 246 Mass. 510, 141 N.E. 494 ... J. A ... Cunningham, of Booneville, for appellee ... There ... is quite a broad distinction ... ...