Gross v. Kubel
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
The defendant, the insured, was not at the time of the accident operating his automobile for carrying passengers for hire: P. R. R. Co. v. Price, 96 Pa. 256; Bricker v. R. R. Co., 132 Pa. 1; Sweigart v. Shreiner, 14 D. & C. 435. The provision of the policy applies only to a regular use of the property insured: Murphy & Co. v. Cas. Co., 89 Pa. Superior Ct. 281.
1Opinion of the Court
Per Curiam,
These four appeals arise from the same set of facts and will be disposed of together. Appellants, who were plaintiffs in the court below, sought by attachment sur judgment to enforce the liability of garnishee upon its policy of insurance issued to defendant Kubel. Plaintiffs had obtained judgments against Kubel in actions to recover damages for injuries sustained by the minor plaintiffs in an accident which occurred while they were traveling in defendant’s automobile. The garnishee disclaimed liability under the insurance policy on the ground of violation of a condition providing…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Lewis v. Fidelity & Casualty Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1931
- Murphy & Co. v. Manufacturers' Casualty Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1926
- Pennsylvania Railroad v. PriceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1881
- Bricker v. Phil. & R. R.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1890
- Doolan v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co.Supreme Court of New Hampshire · 1932
3Cited by26 opinions
- McCornack v. PickerellSupreme Court of Iowa · 1939
- Myers v. Ocean Accident & Guarantee CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1938
- Orcutt v. Erie Indemnity Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1934
- Consolidated Mutual Ins. Co. v. Ivy Liquors, Inc.District Court of Appeal of Florida · 1966
- Park v. National Casualty Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1936
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.