Legal Opinion
Lewellyn v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance
Tennessee Supreme Court
Decided January 31, 1969PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Humphreys
The question presented by this appeal is, whether State Farm’s policy insuring Lewellyns truck provided coverage *544where a borrowed mobile welding rig wbicb Lewellyn was palling behind his track, came loose and damaged an aatomobile and injured a passenger therein. The Chancellor held there was no coverage, and we agree.
The pertinent provisions of the policy are to be foand in the definition section, relating to insaring agreements 1 and 2; and in the insaring agreement 2, relating to non-owned aatomobiles. A non-owned aatomobile is defined as including a non-owned trailer.1
A trailer is defined…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Waddey v. Maryland Casualty Co.Tennessee Supreme Court · 1937
- Blue Ridge Insurance Company v. HaunTennessee Supreme Court · 1954
3Cited by8 opinions
- Smith v. Shelby Insurance Co. of the Shelby Insurance GroupCourt of Appeals of Tennessee · 1996
- Lewellyn v. STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INS. CO.Tennessee Supreme Court · 1969
- Forrest Construction, Inc. v. The Cincinnati Insurance Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2013
- Amco Insurance Company v. ChesleyIdaho Supreme Court · 1972
- Purdy v. Tennessee Farmers Mutual Insurance Co.Court of Appeals of Tennessee · 1979
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.