Dairyland Insurance v. Ward

(dissenting) — Although I may be inclined to sympathy with the result reached by the majority, I am wholly unable to agree that the “use of other automobiles” clause here involved is ambiguous. Hence, I am compelled to dissent.

Briefly, the pertinent, facts are these. Mark Donovick, a minor residing with his parents, purchased a 1962 Chevy II 4-door sedan in September 1970. He applied for, obtained, and paid for liability coverage for his automobile from Dairyland Insurance Company, hereafter referred to as Dairyland. Mike and Mildred Donovick, Mark’s parents, owned and kept at the family…