Stuart

20th Century Insurance v. Stuart

Good Law
129 Cal. App. 3d 370·181 Cal. Rptr. 61·1982 Cal. App. LEXIS 1328
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMarch 1, 1982Civ. 63472California861 words

Opinion

Opinion

Roth, J.

On March 14, 1979: (a) appellant 20th Century Insurance Company was the insurer of respondent Dagmar Stuart under an automobile liability insurance policy; (b) Stuart and her mother, respondent Olga Auerbach, resided in the same household; (c) Stuart, while operating the automobile described in the insurance policy, collided with Auerbach while the latter was a pedestrian.

Auerbach sued Stuart for personal injuries. 20th Century undertook defense of Stuart concurrently seeking declaratory relief by motion for summary judgment that it was not bound to defend because the “family exclusion” in the Stuart policy effectively eliminated coverage in Stuart’s favor. Respondents answered asserting that the “family exclusion” clause upon which 20th Century relied was overly broad and therefore void as against public policy.

- The parties thereafter made several motions for summary judgment. The trial court determined the “family exclusion” provision herein relied upon by 20th Century was invalid. 20th Century appeals. We reverse.

The policy language in issue is as follows: “. . . (2) The unqualified word ‘insured’ includes (a) with respect to any automobile as hereinafter…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.