Whitney v. American Fidelity Co.
| Decision Date | 06 April 1966 |
| Citation | 350 Mass. 542,215 N.E.2d 767 |
| Parties | Carla R. WHITNEY v. AMERICAN FIDELITY COMPANY. |
| Court | United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court |
Frederick G. Talabach, Boston, for plaintiff.
James F. Lawton and James F. Lawton, Jr., Boston, for defendant.
Before WILKINS, C.J., and WHITTEMORE, CUTTER, SPIEGEL and REARDON, JJ.
In this action of contract the plaintiff seeks to recover damages for personal injuries under a contract of insurance which had been issued to her father but which also covered her. She sustained personal injuries in an accident while a guest in an automobile owned and operated by one Philip Clegg, whose only insurance was a compulsory motor vehicle liability policy required by G.L. c. 90, §§ 34A--34J. There was a statement of agreed facts. 'Coverage U' in the policy issued by the defendant to the plaintiff's father obligated the defendant to pay all sums which the plaintiff would be legally entitled to recover as damages from the owner or operator 'of an uninsured automobile because of bodily injury, sickness or disease, including death resulting therefrom * * * sustained by the insured, caused by accident and arising out of the ownership, maintenance or use of such uninsured automobile * * *.' The policy defined an uninsured automobile as 'an automobile with respect to the ownership, maintenance or use of which there is no bodily injury liability bond or insurance policy applicable at the time of the accident with respect to any person or organization legally responsible for the use of such automobile * * *' (emphasis supplied). The issue before us is whether, since Clegg carried a compulsory policy on his automobile but made no provision against injuries to guests by means of either a bond or by insurance, it can be held that there was no 'bodily injury liability bond or insurance policy applicable at the time of the accident.' Dictionary definitions of the word 'applicable' include the words 'fit,' 'suitable,' 'pertinent,' 'appropriate,' or 'capable of being applied.' In view of these definitions, it could be said that at the time of the accident Clegg's automobile was uninsured within the definition of the policy in that there was no bond or insurance with respect to him 'capable of being applied' to the bodily injuries of this plaintiff. There was at least ambiguity present in the definition of the 'uninsured automobile' and ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
City of New York v. Beretta U.S.A. Corp.
...is defined as `fit, suitable, pertinent, related to, or appropriate; capable of being applied'"); Whitney v. American Fidelity Co., 350 Mass. 542, 215 N.E.2d 767, 768 (1966) ("Dictionary definitions of the word `applicable' include words `fit,' `suitable,' `pertinent,' `appropriate,' or `ca......
-
Ileto v. Glock, Inc.
...C 1518, 1995 WL 68823, at *3 (N.D.Ill. Feb.13, 1995); Interwest Constr. v. Palmer, 923 P.2d 1350 (Utah 1996); Whitney v. American Fidelity Co., 350 Mass. 542, 215 N.E.2d 767 (1966)). Based on these authorities, the Beretta Court found that the word "applicable" was unambiguous and, as such,......
-
Panesis v. Loyal Protective Life Ins. Co.
...See American Fid. & Cas. Co. Inc. v. London & Edinburgh Ins. Co., 354 F.2d 214, 216 (4th Cir. 1965). Compare Whitney v. American Fid. Co., 350 Mass. 542, 544, 215 N.E.2d 767 (1966). 2. The defendant also contends that the judge should have granted its motion for summary judgment or directed......
-
Allen v. West American Ins. Co.
...statute. The various plaintiffs cite Bowsher v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Company, 244 Or. 549, 419 P.2d 606; Whitney v. American Fidelity Company, 350 Mass. 542, 215 N.E.2d 767; Lopez v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Company, 250 Cal.App.2d 210, 58 Cal.Rptr. 243; Stevens v. American Service ......