McPhee v. Tufty

[¶ 68] I agree with parts I and II of the majority opinion. I respectfully dissent from parts III, A and B.

[¶ 69] The first question presented under the AMCO policy is whether there is coverage for Curtis Tufty for the liability, imputed to him by the family car doctrine, for the negligence of his son, Christopher, while driving an automobile.

[¶ 70] As the majority points out, the AMCO policy provides, “We will pay damages for ‘bodily injury’ or ‘property damage’ for which any ‘insured’ becomes legally responsible because of an auto accident.” This language would seem to provide coverage for…