Goossen

Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co. v. Goossen

Good Law
148 Cal. Rptr. 784·1978 Cal. App. LEXIS 1906·84 Cal. App. 3d 649
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaSeptember 7, 1978Civ. 52408California1,008 words

Opinion

Opinion

Kingsley, J.

Defendant appeals from an adverse judgment in an action for declaratory relief. We affirm the judgment.

Defendant, while riding on a motorcycle, was injured by a collision with an uninsured motorist. He claims to be entitled to indemnity under a policy issued by plaintiff to a man named Tench. The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of the insurer. We affirm.

The case at bench turns on the interpretation and application of section 11580.2 of the Insurance Code and a provision in the Tench policy purporting to define language in the statute.

Section 11580.2 of the Insurance Code reads, in pertinent part, as follows: “As used in (a) above, ‘bodily injury’ includes sickness or disease, including death, resulting therefrom; the term ‘named insured’ means only the individual or organization named in the declarations of the policy of motor vehicle bodily injury liability insurance referred to in (a) above; as used in (a) above the term ‘insured’ means the named insured and the spouse of the named insured and relatives of either while residents of the same household while occupants of a motor vehicle or otherwise, heirs and any other person while in or upon or…

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.