Michaelson v. Simula , 170.

Decision Date02 October 1933
Docket NumberNo. 170.,170.
Citation250 N.W. 264,264 Mich. 457
CourtMichigan Supreme Court


Appeal from Circuit Court, Ontonagon County; George O. Driscoll, Judge.

Suit by Ida Michaelson against Michael Simula. Judgment in favor of plaintiff, who brought garnishment proceedings against the Preferred Automobile Insurance Company. From a judgment in favor of garnishor, garnishee appeals.

Reversed and remanded, with direction.

Argued before the Entire Bench.Charles M. Humphrey and Charles M. Humphrey, Jr., both of Ironwood (Harry E. Rodgers, of Grand Rapids, of counsel), for appellant.

Edward F. Le Gendre, of Laurium (Louis A. Keary, of Hancock, of counsel), for appellee.

FEAD, Justice.

Defendant Simula and plaintiff live in Northern Michigan and are brother and sister. They desired to attend the funeral of a relative in the city of Detroit. Simula had an automobile, and plaintiff proposed that he drive to Detroit and she would pay for the gasoline, his meals, and the repairs, if any, for the car. The offer was accepted, and they started on the trip and had not proceeded far when the automobile went into a ditch at a turn in the road and plaintiff was injured.

In the declaration, first filed, plaintiff alleged that she ‘was being conveyed as a guest’ and the accident occurred by reason of defendant's negligence. That declaration stated no case, because it failed to allege that the accident was ‘caused by the gross negligence or wilful and wanton misconduct’ of defendant. Comp. Laws 1929, § 4648. In an amended declaration plaintiff alleged that she ‘was being conveyed as a passenger for hire.’ That declaration, as pointed out later, released defendant insurance company from liability to the principal defendant. In still another amendment she alleged that she was a ‘passenger and guest paying for her transportation.’

Plaintiff tried the case on the theory she was a passenger for hire and the court submitted it to the jury on an issue of ordinary negligence on the part of defendant and plaintiff had judgment for $1,000 damages. Upon the judgment plaintiff sued out a writ of garnishment against defendant company, the insurance carrier for her brother. The insurance company filed a disclosure of no indebtedness and demanded trial of the issue thereon. The court tried the issue and found the insurance company liable. The insurance company prosecutes this appeal, claiming that, if plaintiff was a guest, the statute barred recovery unless the driver of the car was charged with and was guilty of wanton or willful misconduct and, if plaintiff was a passenger for hire or paying for her transportation, the policy of insurance expressly relieved the insurance company from liability.

The insurance policy...

To continue reading

Request your trial
8 cases
  • American Mut. Liability Ins. Co. v. Michigan Mut. Liability Co.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Michigan — District of US
    • 22 Septiembre 1975
    ...243 Mich. 209, 220 N.W. 301 (1928); Chatham-Trenary Land Co. v. Swigart, 245 Mich. 430, 222 N.W. 749 (1929); Michaelson v. Simula, 264 Mich. 457, 250 N.W. 264 (1933); Rodgers v. Mikolajczak, 361 Mich. 61, 105 N.W.2d 25 (1960); Burgess v. Holder, 362 Mich. 53, 106 N.W.2d 379 (1960). Other ci......
  • Loomis v. Church
    • United States
    • Idaho Supreme Court
    • 10 Diciembre 1954
    ...Bro., 1902, 109 La. 1036, 34 So. 68; Williams v. Gilkerson-Sloss Commission Co., 1893, 45 La.Ann. 1013, 13 So. 394; Michaelson v. Simula, 1933, 264 Mich. 457, 250 N.W. 264; Weiss v. Stein, 1920, 209 Mich. 482, 177 N.W. 224; Stretch v. Watson, 1949, 6 N.J.Super. 456, 69 A.2d 596; McAuslan v.......
  • Mertz v. Mertz
    • United States
    • Michigan Supreme Court
    • 9 Abril 1945
    ...Co., 213 Mich. [489], 495, 182 N.W. 27.' See, also, Noto v. Acme Truck Sales & Service Co., 270 Mich. 394, 259 N.W. 300;Michaelson v. Simula, 264 Mich. 457, 250 N.W. 264;Bunnell v. Ward, 241 Mich. 404, 217 N.W. 68;Hunt v. Stevens, 174 Mich. 501, 140 N.W. 992;Cline v. Wixson, 128 Mich. 255, ......
  • Hale v. Fireman's Fund Ins. Co.
    • United States
    • Oregon Supreme Court
    • 2 Noviembre 1956
    ...Peters v. Sturmer, 263 Mich. 494, 248 N.W. 875; Beals v. Central Mutual Auto Ins. Co., 269 Mich. 477, 257 N.W. 868; Michaelson v. Simula, 264 Mich. 457, 250 N.W. 264. Judgments whose force may be affected by future events will not be declared. 87 A.L.R. 'Other reasons suggest themselves for......
  • 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