Travelers Ins. Co. v. Employers Cas. Co.
Decision Date | 20 April 1960 |
Docket Number | No. 10754,10754 |
Citation | 335 S.W.2d 235 |
Parties | TRAVELERS INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellant, v. EMPLOYERS CASUALTY COMPANY, Appellee. |
Court | Texas Court of Appeals |
Gay & Meyers, Austin, for appellant.
Leachman, Gardere, Akin & Porter, Dallas, for appellee.
This is an appeal from an order of the 98th District Court of Travis County, Texas, sustaining a plea of privilege filed by appellee, Employers Casualty Company, to be sued in Dallas County, Texas, the location of its principal place of business.
The appeal is based on two points:
'1. The error of the Court in sustaining, and not overruling, appellee's plea of privilege.
'2. The error of the Court in holding that appellant failed to prove that the accidental injuries to Sam Steward Smith occurred during the unloading of the truck covered by appellee's policy of insurance within the meaning of that policy.'
This suit was filed as a declaratory judgment action to determine which of the two insurance companies afforded primary coverage for the fatal injuries sustained by Sam Smith in Travis County allegedly as a proximate result of the negligence of Borders Steel Erection Company. Travelers had insured Borders under a general liability policy. Employers had issued a standard automobile liability policy for Capitol Aggregates, Inc., on its cement trucks and to any other person while using such trucks with consent of Capitol. The beneficiaries of Smith instituted suit against Borders and Travelers undertook the defense, made a compromise of claims asserted against Borders, sought a court ruling that primary coverage was under Employers' policy since Borders was using the truck of Capitol within the meaning of the policy, which provided that use of the truck should include 'the loading and unloading thereof.'
Appellee filed its plea of privilege to be sued in Dallas County, the county of its residence. The controverting plea alleged that venue was properly in Travis County by virtue of Subdivision 23 of Art. 1995, Vernon's Ann.Civ.St.
At the hearing before the court without a jury appellant introduced replies to requests for admissions, and the original petition, other pleadings and certain stipulations that Travelers was the insurer of Borders; that Employers issued to Capitol a standard Texas automobile policy containing provisions definding 'use' as to the 'loading and unloading thereof'; that the trucks would empty the concrete into a bucket attached to a crane belonging to Borders located at the construction site; that the crane buckled and inflicted the fatal injuries to Smith; that the crane was being used to transport the bucket to a portion of the construction work.
Appellant says that the narrow question on appeal is whether or not the alleged negligent acts of Borders, resulting in Smith's death, occurred while the concrete truck was being unloaded.
Appellee takes the position that the truck had been completely unloaded within the meaning of the policy prior to the time when the boom of the crane collapsed.
Capitol had an agreement to deliver the mix to the job site. Borders furnished certain buckets into which the mix was to be unloaded. The truck driver emptied the mix into the bucket, after which the bucket was moved by the crane owned and operated by Borders.
H. Q. Haile, Jr., called by defendant, appellee, testified:
'
'
'
On cross-examination Mr. Haile testified that when possible the mix was delivered to the place it was to be used and that delivery of the mix was completed as soon as it leaves the truck and Capitol was no longer responsible for it; that when the mix is put into the bucket attached to the crane there was no duty to take the mix to where it was to be used.
The Trial Court sustained the plea and ordered the transfer of the cause to Dallas County.
No request for findings of fact and conclusions of law was made.
We believe the court was correct in entering the order transferring the cause and impliedly in finding that appellant failed to prove a cause of action against appellee, and that any negligence of Borders proximately causing the fatal injuries to Smith occurred after the completion of the...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Continental Casualty Co. v. Fireman's Fund Insurance Co.
...any appeal to that state's Supreme Court was concurrently, or otherwise formally, taken in Travelers Insurance Company v. Employers Casualty Company (Court of Civil Appeals, Austin) 335 S.W.2d 235, after the earlier denial by the Supreme Court with a writ of error in that case, supra, does ......
-
St. Paul Mercury Insurance Company v. Huitt
...18 A.D.2d 126, 238 N.Y.S.2d 495 (1963), decided by the Supreme Court Appellate Division, Third Department; Travelers Ins. Co. v. Employers Casualty Co., 335 S.W.2d 235 (1960), decided by the Texas Court of Civil Appeals; and Travelers Insurance Co. v. Employers Casualty Co., 370 S.W. 2d 105......
-
Allstate Insurance Company v. Valdez
...895; Texas: American Employers' Ins. Co. v. Brock, Tex.Civ.App.1948, 215 S.W. 2d 370; but see also Travelers Insurance Company v. Employers Casualty Company, Tex.Civ.App.1960, 335 S.W. 2d 235; Virginia: London Guarantee & Accident Co. v. C. B. White & Bros. Inc., 1948, 188 Va. 195, 49 S.E.2......
-
Travelers Ins. Co. v. Employers Cas. Co., A-9808
...the Court of Civil Appeals at Austin in the appeal from the order sustaining Employers' plea of privilege. Travelers Ins. Co. v. Employers Casualty Co., Tex.Civ.App., 335 S.W.2d 235 (writ ref. n. r. e.). On the basis of the authorities cited by the parties at that time, it was then our opin......