Reynolds v. Select Properties, Ltd.
| Decision Date | 05 March 1993 |
| Docket Number | No. 92,92 |
| Citation | 616 So.2d 742 |
| Parties | Ron REYNOLDS v. SELECT PROPERTIES, LTD., d/b/a Allsafe Mini Storage and Guaranty Income Life Insurance Company. CA 0090. |
| Court | Court of Appeal of Louisiana — District of US |
Clinton Hyatt, Jr., Baton Rouge, for plaintiff-appellee, Ron Reynolds.
Donald M. Meltzer, Baton Rouge, for defendant-appellant, Guar. Income Life Ins. Co.
Stephen R. Wilson, Baton Rouge, for third party defendant, Transcontinental, Ins. Co.
Before CARTER, LeBLANC and PITCHER, JJ.
This appeal arises out of a trial court judgment granting a motion for summary judgment.
On December 29, 1987, plaintiff, Ron Reynolds, leased a self-storage unit in Allsafe Mini Storage ("Allsafe"), located at 15423 Old Hammond Highway in Baton Rouge, Louisiana. Allsafe is owned by Guaranty Income Life Insurance Company ("Guaranty") and managed by Select Properties Limited ("Select"). Reynolds used the storage unit to store personal property belonging to him and his family. Reynolds had not been to the storage unit for a few months, and upon returning there in September of 1989, he found that some of his property had been stolen. During 1989, Transcontinental Insurance Company ("Transcontinental") had sold a policy of commercial general liability insurance to Guaranty, which allegedly provided coverage for the loss alleged by Reynolds.
On July 6, 1990, Reynolds filed the instant suit against Select and Guaranty, alleging that they were liable for the loss of his personal property. Select and Guaranty answered the petition and filed a third party demand against Transcontinental. Guaranty alleged that, under the commercial general liability insurance policy, Transcontinental owed Guaranty owed a defense in the suit.
On April 2, 1991, Transcontinental filed a motion for summary judgment, asserting that the insurance policy issued to Guaranty excludes coverage for the property damages incurred by Reynolds. More specifically, the property of Reynolds was "in the care, custody or control" of Guaranty; therefore, it was excluded from coverage.
The trial court granted Transcontinental's motion for summary judgment, finding that the premises in question were not the insured premises under Transcontinental's policy. The trial court also found that coverage was expressly excluded for property damage to "personal" property in Guaranty's care, custody or control. The trial court rendered judgment in favor of Transcontinental and against Guaranty by judgment dated November 8, 1991. From this judgment, Guaranty appeals.
At issue is whether the trial court erred in finding that an exclusionary clause contained in the comprehensive general liability policy issued by Transcontinental to Guaranty expressly excluded from coverage property damage to "personal" property in Guaranty's care, custody or control. 1
Generally, a motion for summary judgment should be granted only if the pleadings, depositions, answers to interrogatories and admissions on file, together with affidavits show there is no genuine issue as to material fact and that mover is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. LSA-C.C.P. art. 966; Kerwin v. Nu-Way Construction Service, Inc., 451 So.2d 1193, 1194 (La.App. 5th Cir.), writ denied, 457 So.2d 11 (La.1984); Landry v. Brandy, 389 So.2d 93, 95 (La.App. 4th Cir.1980). The burden is upon the mover for summary judgment to show that no genuine issues of material fact exist, and only when reasonable minds inevitably conclude that mover is entitled to judgment as a matter of law is summary judgment warranted. Frazier v. Freeman, 481 So.2d 184, 186 (La.App. 1st Cir.1985); Asian International, Ltd. v. Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner and Smith, Inc., 435 So.2d 1058, 1063 (La.App. 1st Cir.1983).
Summary judgments are not favored, and any reasonable doubt should be resolved against the mover. Dupuy v. Gonday, 450 So.2d 1014, 1015 (La.App. 1st Cir.1984). In determining whether material issues have in fact been disposed of, any doubt is to be resolved against granting the summary judgment and in favor of trial on the merits. Sanders v. Hercules Sheet Metal, Inc., 385 So.2d 772, 775 (La.1980); Chaisson v. Domingue, 372 So.2d 1225, 1227 (La.1979).
The law is well settled that if there is any doubt or ambiguity as to the meaning of a provision in an insurance policy, it must be construed in favor of the insured and...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Reynolds v. Select Properties, Ltd.
...had exercised "care, custody or control" over the property and, therefore, the coverage exclusion in the Transcontinental policy applied, 616 So.2d 742. We granted Guaranty's writ application 1 to determine whether the lower courts' analysis of the applicability of the coverage exclusion is......
-
97-2356 La.App. 4 Cir. 9/9/98, Treadaway v. Progressive Northwestern Ins.
...afforded. Bilbo v. Shelter Insurance Company, 96-1476 (La.App. 1 Cir. 7/30/97), 698 So.2d 691, 694; citing Reynolds v. Select Properties, Ltd., 616 So.2d 742 (La.App. 1 Cir.1993); writ granted 93-1480 (La.4/11/94), 634 So.2d 1180, revised 634 So.2d The endorsement provides: NAMED DRIVER EXC......
-
Reynolds v. Select Properties, Ltd.
...Storage and Guaranty Income Life Insurance Company. No. 93-C-1480. Supreme Court of Louisiana. Sept. 24, 1993. Prior report: La.App., 616 So.2d 742. In re Guaranty Income Life Ins. Co.;--Defendant(s); applying for writ of certiorari and/or review; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. ......