United States v. United Services Automobile Association
| Decision Date | 09 July 1970 |
| Docket Number | No. 29031.,29031. |
| Citation | 431 F.2d 735 |
| Parties | UNITED STATES of America, Robert H. Busch and Mrs. Marguerite Busch, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. UNITED SERVICES AUTOMOBILE ASSOCIATION, Defendant-Appellant. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Fifth Circuit |
Robert B. Thornton, Hobart Huson, Jr., San Antonio, Tex., for defendant-appellant.
Seagal V. Wheatley, U. S. Atty., Richard Tinsman, Tinsman & Cunningham, Anthony Nicholas, Nicholas & Barrera, San Antonio, Tex., Robert V. Zener, Dept. of Justice, William D. Appler, Washington, D. C., for plaintiffs-appellees.
Before TUTTLE, THORNBERRY and INGRAHAM, Circuit Judges.
The minor son of an Air Force officer was struck by an automobile and received treatment for his injuries at government expense, which is provided for by 10 U.S.C.A. § 1076. The officer and the United States brought suit on the medical payment provision of the officer's automobile insurance policy, issued by United Services Automobile Association.
At the time of the injury Major Busch had outstanding protection under an automobile liability insurance policy, whereunder in Part II, entitled "Expenses for Medical Services," there was contained the following language:
"To pay all reasonable expenses incurred within one year from the date of accident for necessary medical, surgical, X-ray and dental services * * * Division 1: to or for the named insured and each relative who sustains bodily injury, * * * (c) through being struck by an automobile or trailer of any type."
In addition, Part II provided that "the limit of liability for medical payments stated in the declaration as applicable to `each person' is the limit of the company's liability for all expenses incurred by or on behalf of each person who sustains bodily injury as a result of any one accident."
Further, in the portion of the policy entitled "Conditions," the policy provided that "the Company may pay the injured person or any person or organization rendering the services and such payments shall reduce the amount payable hereunder for such injury."
The Company having refused to pay the United States for its outlay of $2223.75, plus penalty and reasonable attorneys' fees, as provided for by Texas statute, the government sued, and both parties having moved for summary judgment, the trial court entered summary judgment for the United States, based solely upon its construction of the policy involved.
We conclude that the United States was clearly a third-party beneficiary...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Armstrong v. U.S.
...in which buyer assumed tax liabilities of seller but retained defenses against United States as well); United States v. United Services Automobile Ass'n., 431 F.2d 735, 737 (5th Cir.1970) (holding, based on the language of the contract, the United States to be the third-party beneficiary of......
-
Beverly v. Macy
...imposes duty in favor of third party law presumes parties intended to confer benefit on third party); United States v. United Services Automobile Ass'n, 431 F.2d 735, 737 (5th Cir.1970) (Federal Government may sue as third-party beneficiary to collect on insurance policy requiring payment t......
-
Coleman v. Associated Pipeline Contractors, Inc.
...this Court will not indulge in de novo consideration of Associated's status. See, e. g., United States v. United Services Automobile Association, 5 Cir. 1970, 431 F.2d 735, 737, cert. denied, 1971, 400 U.S. 992, 91 S.Ct. 459, 27 L. Ed.2d 440; Laguna Royalty Co. v. Marsh, 5 Cir. 1965, 350 F.......
-
United States v. Nationwide Mutual Insurance Co.
...4 Cir., 1972, 461 F.2d 58; United States v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 10 Cir., 1972, 455 F.2d 789; United States v. United Services Auto Ass'n, 5 Cir., 1970, 431 F.2d 735. I also am of the opinion that the exclusion quoted in Judge Wright's opinion does not plainly refer to the govern......