Shields v. Hiram C. Gardner, Inc.

The majority opinion is to the effect that under the typewritten General Change En*430dorsement No. 1, appellant insured respondent from all losses arising out of “erroneous delivery of seeds, errors in mechanical mixtures, * * * germination failure, * and that an error in mechanical mixture took place at Buhl, Idaho; and hence appellant was obligated to defend the action against Shields and pay all damages and costs of defense. The basis for such conclusion can be summarized as follows: that the General Change Endorsement No. 1 is typewritten; it is ambiguous, and hence must be construed against…