Matsuo Yoshida and Chisato Yoshida v. Liberty Mutual Insurance Company, a Corporation

Bad Law
240 F.2d 824·1957 U.S. App. LEXIS 3411
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJanuary 31, 195715121California3,226 words

Opinion

Opinion

Barnes, J.

Appellants Matsuo and Chisato Yoshida, husband and wife, obtained a judgment against one Sylvester Gonzales in the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles, in 1955 for personal injuries sustained in an automobile collision occurring on April 15, 1953. The judgment unsatisfied, appellants instituted this action in the District Court to recover the amount of the award from Gonzales’ insurer, Liberty Mutual Insurance Company. The action, tried by the court without a jury, was successfully defended by the Company on the ground that Gonzales owned the vehicle involved in the accident and that his policy coverage did not extend to an automobile owned by him.

On appeal appellants make two general arguments: (1) Gonzales was not the owner of the car within the meaning of the policy provisions; (2) appellee has waived its defenses or is estopped as a matter of law to deny liability under the policy,- by reason of its conduct in respect to Gonzales’ application for insurance and/or another accident which preceded the one in question.

I. Was Gonzales the Owner of the Car?

The initial point is without merit. The automobile liability insurance policy contained, inter alia, 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.