Condon

Allstate Insurance v. Condon

Good Law
198 Cal. App. 3d 148·1988 Cal. App. LEXIS 72·243 Cal. Rptr. 623
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaFebruary 3, 1988D005012California2,119 words

Opinion

Opinion

Todd, J.

Heidi and George Condon appeal from a summary judgment in favor of Allstate Insurance Company. Allstate filed an action seeking a declaration of the rights of the respective parties concerning an auto insurance policy insuring Joyce Childs Willoughby. Willoughby’s son, Brian Keith Susberry, while driving a Toyota, struck Heidi Condon as she walked through an intersection. The Condons allege multiple errors were made when the trial court granted Allstate’s summary judgment motion, denying coverage under the policy. First, because “owner” or “non-owned” are not more precisely defined, “non-owned” is ambiguous and must be interpreted so as to afford the Condons coverage. Second, the court could not properly deny recovery based upon the special nonowned auto exclusion clause because: 1. it is ambiguous; 2. a more descriptive word could have been used to characterize the scope of exclusion; and, 3. the excluding language is not placed in a section marked “Exclusions.” For the reasons set forth below, we affirm the order of the trial court.

Facts

Joyce Willoughby owned an Allstate automobile insurance policy for the period June 27, 1981, through December 27, 1981. This policy…

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.