Szemeredi

Allstate Insurance v. Szemeredi

Good Law
54 F. App'x 261
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitDecember 17, 2002Nos. 01-16689, 01-16832; D.C. No. CV-00-02896-PJHCalifornia539 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Allstate Insurance Company appeals the determination that Peter Szemeredi was covered by his parents’ automobile insurance policy for Lability incurred while a passenger in a car, not owned by the Szemeredi family, driven by Brian Meade. We reverse. Appellees Barbara Swor, Patricia Wiley, and Andrew Simpson cross-appeal the determination that neither Szemeredi nor another passenger, Jonathan Drew, were covered for the same incident under the terms of their parents’ Homeowner’s Insurance Policies. We affirm. Because the facts are familiar to the parties, we recount them only as necessary to explain our decision.

1. In his role as a passenger, Peter Szemeredi did not “use” the Meade car in the sense in which that term is employed in the relevant automobile policy. Certainly, the term “use” is amenable to varied interpretations. Had the policies explicitly adopted a definition of the term “use” which encompassed a passenger riding in a vehicle, we would be bound by the language of the policy, even though the term “use” is otherwise defined for purposes of the California Insurance Code. See State Farm Fire & Cas. Co. v. W.C.A.B., 16 Cal.4th 1187 , 69 Cal.Rptr.2d 602 ,…

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.