Hurst

Aetna Insurance v. Hurst

Good Law
1969 Cal. App. LEXIS 1489·2 Cal. App. 3d 1067·83 Cal. Rptr. 156
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaDecember 23, 1969Civ. 33775California1,005 words

Opinion

Opinion

Files, J.

The facts are not in dispute. On September 7, 1965, defendant Walter Hurst, while operating an uninsured two-wheeled motorcycle owned by him, was involved in an accident with an uninsured motorist. Defendant Yolanda Hurst, who is Walter’s wife, owned a Pontiac automobile, which had been insured by plaintiff. The policy included a coverage called “protection against uninsured motorists.” Walter claimed that he sustained injuries caused by the negligence of the uninsured motorist. On that ground he sought indemnification under Yolanda’s policy.

Plaintiff then brought this action seeking a declaration by the court that the provisions of its policy excluded coverage of Walter’s claim.

The policy written for Yolanda contains, among other things, these provisions with respect to uninsured motorists: “[Aetna Insurance Company agrees] To pay all sums which the insured or his legal representative shall 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, hereinafter called ‘bodily injury,’ sustained by the insured, . . .”

“ ‘Insured’ means: (a) the…

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.