Legal Opinion · Dissent

State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. v. Whitehead

Missouri Court of Appeals

Decided May 29, 1986No. 13704Published

1DissentMaus, Judge

With respect for the majority opinion and the authorities cited and supporting that opinion, I must dissent. For the purpose of this opinion it must be assumed the decedent was negligent. But, that is not determinative of the issue presented. The issue *202is whether or not the plaintiff insured against the risk that resulted in the injury. I believe the accidental injury resulted from the decedent’s negligence in his actions as a juvenile officer and a deputy sheriff, not from negligence in the use of the automobile as those terms are employed in the policy.

This conclusion is not contrary to…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Associated Indemnity Corp. v. WarnerArizona Supreme Court · 1985
  2. Schmidt v. Utilities Insurance Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1944
  3. Detroit Automobile Inter-Insurance Exchange v. HigginbothamMichigan Court of Appeals · 1980
  4. National Union F. Ins. Co. of Pittsburgh, Pa. v. BruecksNebraska Supreme Court · 1966
  5. Norgaard v. Nodak Mutual Insurance CompanyNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1972

10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API