Ranger Ins. Co. v. Bowie

• Decision Date: 29 November 1978
• Docket Number: No. B-7581,B-7581
• Parties: RANGER INSURANCE COMPANY, Petitioner, v. Doris BOWIE, Respondent.
• Court: Texas Supreme Court

Page 540

574 S.W.2d 540

RANGER INSURANCE COMPANY, Petitioner, v. Doris BOWIE, Respondent.

No. B-7581.

Supreme Court of Texas.

Nov. 29, 1978.

Rehearing Denied Jan. 10, 1979.

Ray, Anderson, Shields, Trotti & Hemphill, L. W. Anderson, Dallas, for petitioner.

Harold J. Dollinger, Jr., Dallas, for respondent.

JOHNSON, Justice.

Doris Bowie instituted this suit against Ranger Insurance Company to recover on an insurance policy for damage done to her husband's airplane when it crashed into the ground near Garland, Texas on May 5, 1975. She sued Ranger individually and as executrix of the estate of her husband, Loren C. Bowie. On the occasion in question, Bowie was piloting the plane and was alone in the aircraft. He was found dead at the crash site. The cause of the crash was undetermined. American Bank & Trust Company intervened, claiming a security interest in the damaged airplane, but it did not pursue an appeal following a decision adverse to it in the trial court.

The case was tried to the court based mainly upon stipulated facts and deposition testimony. The trial court rendered a take-nothing judgment against the Bank and Mrs. Bowie. Upon appeal by Mrs. Bowie, the court of civil appeals reversed and rendered judgment awarding her $7,500, the amount provided for in the policy. 563 S.W.2d 394. We reverse the judgment of the court of civil appeals and affirm the judgment of the trial court.

Loren Bowie had a history of heart trouble since 1962. He nevertheless applied for a private pilot's license in 1971. At the same time, he applied for the required airman's medical certificate; in so doing, he deliberately and knowingly denied that he had prior heart trouble. He repeated this misrepresentation two years later, in 1973, when he applied for renewal of his medical certificate. Even at the time of his death, he was taking medication for his heart condition. It was stipulated by the parties that had Loren Bowie not made these false representations he would not have been issued a certificate. ¹

The insurance policy on Loren Bowie's plane contained the following clause:

"7. PILOT CLAUSE: Only the following pilot or pilots Holding valid and effective pilot and medical certificates with rating as required by the Federal Aviation Administration for the flight involved will operate the aircraft in flight." (Emphasis added.)

The controlling issue in this case is whether Loren Bowie, as the pilot at the time of the accident, satisfied this clause. Mrs. Bowie claims that since the Federal Aviation Authority had neither revoked nor invalidated her husband's medical certificate, that the certificate is necessarily valid and effective. We disagree.

In a case involving the interpretation of an insurance policy, the general rule in Texas dictates that exceptions and limitations found in an insurance policy are construed against the insurer. Continental Cas. Co. v. Warren, 152 Tex. 164, 254 S.W.2d 762 (1953); and Glover v. National Ins. Underwriters, 545 S.W.2d 755 (Tex.1977). However, this rule is applicable only when the terms of the contract of insurance are susceptible to several reasonable constructions. Mang v. Travelers Insurance Company, 412 S.W.2d 672, 674 (Tex.Civ.App. San Antonio 1967, writ ref'd).

The "pilot clause" in this case clearly contemplates a Valid medical certificate, one which has been granted on the basis of health deemed suitable by the Federal Aviation Administration for the command of an aircraft, not one granted upon the basis of a fraudulent misrepresentation. ² The term "valid"...