Snyder v. Redding Motors
| Decision Date | 11 March 1955 |
| Citation | 131 Cal.App.2d 416,280 P.2d 811 |
| Court | California Court of Appeals Court of Appeals |
| Parties | Harry Conyres SNYDER, Evelyn Ruth Snyder, Plaintiffs and Respondents, v. REDDING MOTORS, a corporation, Cal-Union Agency, a corporation, Colonial Insurance Company of California, a corporation, C. C. Giesicke, and Redding Motors, a Partnership, Defendants, Colonial Insurance Company of California, a corporation, Appellant. Civ. 8490. |
Low & Duryea, San Francisco, for appellant.
Kennedy & Caldwell, Redding, for respondents.
Respondents commenced an action against the above named defendants alleging in their complaint that defendants Giesicke and Redding Motors, a corporation, were the duly authorized agents of defendants Cal-Union Agency and Colonial Insurance Company of California; that respondents applied to Giesicke and Redding Motors for insurance against liability for personal injuries and property damage, and that they, as agents of Cal-Union Agency and Colonial Insurance Company, in consideration of $40.50, agreed to so insure respondents for one year from March 28, 1950, and to deliver a policy in the standard form to respondents; that part of the terms of said policy bound defendants to defend any action against respondents within the policy coverage.
The complaint alleged further that after such insurance was so made and the promise to execute and deliver a policy to respondents, respondents damaged property of Pacific Gas and Electric Company during said term of insurance coverage; that respondents fully performed conditions of said standard form policy of insurance and promptly notified defendants of the damage. That defendants failed and refused to deliver said policy of insurance to respondents in accordance with said agreement and denied any responsibility for the damage caused by respondents and refused to defend any action against the respondents; that thereafter Pacific Gas and Electric Company sued respondents and recovered judgment in the amount of $752.87; that respondents incurred attorney's fees of $500 in defense of said action. Respondents prayed for judgment in the sum of $1,341.77.
Defendants denied the material allegations of the complaint and the action proceeded to trial before the court sitting without a jury.
At the close of respondents' case defendant Colonial Insurance Company moved for a nonsuit, which motion was denied, and the case was then submitted without any evidence being offered by any of the defendants.
The trial court found that defendants C. C. Giesicke and Redding Motors were the agents of defendant Colonial Insurance Company of California; that defendants C. C. Giesicke and Redding Motors solicited and received from plaintiffs an application for a policy of property damage insurance to the extent of $5,000 for the term of one year, commencing upon March 28, 1950, said policy to be issued by the defendant Colonial Insurance Company of California in the standard and usual form issued by said defendants, together with the total premium therefor in the amount of $40.50; and that in consideration of said application and the payment of said premium to defendants the defendants C. C. Giesicke and Redding Motors, as the agents of defendant Colonial Insurance Company of California, agreed to secure and place insurance as aforesaid; that in violation of said agreement defendant Colonial Insurance Company of California, upon receipt of said application failed and neglected to take any action whatsoever thereon, or to issue said policy, or to return said application or to cause said premium to be refunded. The court found further that as a result of an accident on June 24, 1950, respondents incurred liability and legal expenses in the total sum of $1,141.77 and awarded respondents judgment against defendant Colonial Insurance Company of California in that amount. Said defendant's motion for a new trial was denied and it has appealed from said judgment.
Appellant contends that no contract existed between it and respondents, that it did not agree to issue a policy of insurance, that if respondents had any right to recover it was on the ground of negligence and that neither the pleadings nor the evidence permit any such issue, and further that the court's findings are unsupported by the evidence. Before discussing these contentions we shall give a brief summary of the evidence as shown by the record.
On March 28, 1950, Mr. and Mrs. Harry Snyder, plaintiffs and respondents, entered into a conditional sales contract with defendant Redding Motors, a partnership, for the purchase of an automobile. The conditional sales contract showed what types of insurance the purchasers were applying for, namely, comprehensive, collision ($50 deductible). Listed under 'Other Insurance' were the letters B. I. & P. D., which meant bodily injury and property damage. The comprehensive and the collision insurance were to be handled by the Bank of America affiliate, but opposite the provision for 'Other Insurance' it stated 'Redding Motors will place.' The conditional sales contract was signed by the respondents and on behalf of Redding Motors by C. C. Giesicke, one of the partners. At the same time respondents filled out an application for bodily injury liability and property damage liability insurance, which application was received by the Colonial Insurance Company on April 3, 1950.
The application was entitled 'Colonial Insurance Company'; it then set forth the name and address of the applicant, Harry C. Snyder. It set forth the policy period as extending from 3-28-50 to 3-28-51, with an instruction on the application that it not be back dated. It then set forth other items normally asked of an applicant for such insurance, as age, occupation, previous insurance carrier, employer and his address, name of mortgagor, if any, proposed use of the automobile and whether or not it was to be driven by minors. The schedule of coverages is then listed. Only two such coverages were filled in on Mr. Snyder's application, namely:
Then follows a description of the new car sold and the subject matter of the insurance and the signature of the agent; in this case the signature of C. C. Giesicke appears. On the reverse side appears the time and date stamp of the Colonial Insurance Company showing that the application was received by them at 1:56 p. m. on April 3, 1950.
'Coverages Limit of Premium
Liability
-------------------------------------------- ---------------- -------
'A--Bodily Injury Liability Each Person 5,000
Each Accident 10,000 24.00
'B--Property Damage Liability--Each Accident $5,000 16.50
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
'Total Premiums 40.50'
Respondents paid the sum of $40.50 to Redding Motors as the premium for insurance coverage for one year from the date of the application. The application was never acted upon and no policy of insurance was ever issued to respondents. Colonial Insurance Company in its answer denied ever having received the application, but found it in its files just before the trial in this matter. The time and date stamp showed that it had been received by Colonial Insurance Company on the 3rd day of April, 1950, a short time after the purchase of the car. On March 28, 1950, Redding Motors was an agent of the Colonial Insurance Company and the Cal-Union Agency. Redding Motors was appointed and licensed under the provisions of Section 1656 of the Insurance Code.
Defendant Giesicke, called by respondents under Code of Civil Procedure, § 2055, testified that his authority was limited to taking applications for insurance and submitting them to the Colonial Insurance Company. He did not know whether or not the $40.50 received from respondents had been paid over to appellant, his principal, and there is no other evidence on this point.
On June 24, 1950, respondents' automobile damaged property of Pacific Gas and Electric Company to the extent of $752.87, as determined by the trial court in its judgment granted to Pacific Gas and Electric Company in its action against the respondents. Respondents were compelled to defend that action at their own expense, incurring attorney's fees of $325 and costs amounting to $63.90.
The trial judge filed a memorandum opinion which we believe correctly analyzes the facts and the law. We quote therefrom as follows:
'This action is based on a breach of contract, as is stated on the face of the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Voss v. American Mut. Liability Ins. Co., 30464
...of contract. In her brief, she asserts that she is suing in tort. And in support of her right to do so she cites Snyder v. Redding Motors et al. 131 Cal.App.2d 416, 280 P.2d 811; Great Northern Life Ins. Co. v. Scott, 181 Okl. 179, 72 P.2d 790; Columbian National Life Ins. Co. v. Lemmons, 9......
-
Barrera v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co.
...92 N.J.Super. 92, 222 A.2d 282, a case involving facts quite similar to those in the present case. 11 Snyder v. Redding Motors (1955) 131 Cal.App.2d 416, 280 P.2d 811; Smith v. Minnesota Mut. Life Ins. Co. (1948) 86 Cal.App.2d 581, 195 P.2d 457; Stark v. Pioneer Casualty Co., supra, 139 Cal......
-
Matsuo Yoshida v. Liberty Mutual Insurance Co.
...that would reasonably lead Gonzales to believe that he was insured while operating an automobile owned by him. Snyder v. Redding Motors, 131 Cal. App.2d 416, 280 P.2d 811, relied upon heavily by appellants, is distinguishable. There the applicant filed his application and paid his premium t......
-
Foster v. McConnell
...appointment sent him by the commissioner on Western's application amounts in effect to an estoppel. He relies on Snyder v. Redding Motors, 1955, 131 Cal.App.2d 416, 280 P.2d 811, which, however, is not in point. There an insurance company was held liable for a judgment and costs of defense ......