United Fire & Casualty Co. v. Tharp
Missouri Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the Court
SHRUM, Judge.
The issue presented by this appeal is whether Dennis Hyman (“Hyman”) had liability insurance coverage for claims arising from an accident that occurred while he was driving his employer’s van. Specif ically, did Hyman become a non-permissive driver and lose coverage which otherwise existed because at the time of the accident, he was violating his employer’s rules against (1) transporting non-company passengers, and (2) alcohol usage? The trial court, in entering summary judgment against United Fire & Casualty Company (“United”), found there was coverage. United appeals. We affirm.
Also in this document: Concurrence.
2Cases cited21 opinions
- ITT Commercial Finance Corp. v. Mid-America Marine Supply Corp.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1993
- Halpin v. American Family Mutual Insurance Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1992
- Warner Trucking, Inc. v. Carolina Casualty InsuranceIndiana Supreme Court · 1997
- Cain v. State, Texas Court of Appeals, 4th District (San Antonio)1998
- Weathers v. Royal Indemnity Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1979
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Craft v. Philip Morris Companies, Inc.Missouri Court of Appeals · 2005
- BSI Constructors, Inc. v. Hartford Fire InsuranceCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2013
- Hawkeye-Security Insurance v. BunchCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2011
- Doss & Harper Stone Co. v. Hoover Bros. Farms, Inc.Missouri Court of Appeals · 2006
- Vaughan v. United Fire & Casualty Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 2002
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.