Seaton v. Pickens

• Court: Texas Supreme Court
• Writing for the Court: Smedley
• Citation: Seaton v. Pickens, 87 S.W.2d 709, 126 Tex. 271, 106 A.L.R. 512 (Tex. 1935)
• Decision Date: 27 November 1935
• Docket Number: No. 1579 - 6427.,1579 - 6427.
• Parties: SEATON et al. v. PICKENS et al.

87 S.W.2d 709

SEATON et al. v. PICKENS et al.

No. 1579 - 6427.

Commission of Appeals of Texas, Section B.

November 27, 1935.

Error to Court of Civil Appeals of Eighth Supreme Judicial District.

Action by Mrs. Katie Mae Seaton and another against A. S. Pickens and another. To review a judgment of the Court of Civil Appeals [51 S.W.(2d) 1050] reversing a judgment for plaintiffs, plaintiffs bring error.

Judgment of Court of Civil Appeals modified and affirmed.

White & Yarborough, of Dallas, for plaintiffs in error.

James F. Gray, Goggans & Keith, and J. L. Goggans, all of Dallas, and Joe A. Keith, of Sherman, for defendants in error.

T. W. Davidson, of Dallas, as amicus curiæ.

SMEDLEY, Commissioner.

Plaintiff in error Mrs. Seaton, a guest in an automobile owned and operated by defendant in error Pickens, was injured in a collision and sued both Pickens and his insurer, plaintiff in error Universal Automobile Insurance Company, asserting a right to join the insurance company as a defendant in her suit for damages against Pickens, because the company in its policy issued to Pickens had contracted to pay and satisfy all judgments rendered against Pickens on account of injuries inflicted by the automobile.

The insurance company's plea in abatement and exception contesting its joinder as a defendant were overruled. After trial before a jury, judgment was rendered in favor of Mrs. Seaton against both Pickens and the insurance company for $6,500. The Court of Civil Appeals reversed and remanded the cause on account of misconduct of the jury, but construed the policy as creating primary liability on the part of the insurance company in favor of one injured by the assured's negligence, and sustained the trial court's action in overruling the company's plea in abatement and exception. 51 S.W.(2d) 1050.

The decision of the Court of Civil Appeals, in its construction of the policy and in its ruling with respect to joinder of the insurer, is contrary to several recent decisions in which opinions written by the Commission of Appeals were adopted by the Supreme Court, namely: Universal Automobile Insurance Company v. Culberson, 86 S.W.(2d) 727, decided October 30, 1935; Grasso v. Cannon Ball Motor Freight Lines, 81 S.W.(2d) 482; Moxon v. Ray, 81 S.W.(2d) 488; American Fidelity & Casualty Co. v. McClendon, 81 S.W. (2d) 493; Kuntz v. Spence (Tex.Com. App.) 67 S.W.(2d) 254; American Indemnity Company v. Martin, 84 S.W.(2d) 697.

The policy of insurance issued by plaintiff in error Universal Automobile Insurance Company insured Pickens "against direct loss by reason of liability imposed by law upon the assured for damages by reason of the ownership or maintenance of the automobile * * * if such loss be sustained on account of bodily injuries or death accidentally suffered or alleged to have been suffered by any person or persons as the result of an accident occurring while this policy is in force." The policy specifically states the limits of the company's liability to be: (A) To investigate all accidents and to employ attorneys to represent the assured in all suits; (B) "in event a final judgment be rendered against the assured, to pay the same to an amount not exceeding the limits specified herein"; (C) to pay all costs taxed against the assured in any such defended suit, all interest accruing after entry of judgment, and any expense incurred by assured for immediate and imperative surgical relief.

The policy provides that all rights under the same are strictly personal to the assured, but contains a paragraph stating that insolvency or bankruptcy of the assured shall not release the company from the payment of damages for injury or loss occasioned during the life of the policy, and that in case execution against the assured is returned unsatisfied in an action brought by the injured person, "an action may be maintained by the...