American Fidelity & Casualty Co. v. Traders & General Insurance

joined by Justice Norvell dissenting.

Traders & General presented two questions in the Court of Civil Appeals: (a) that its policy did not afford any coverage for the accident or hazard made the basis of Duff’s suit against Mizell for bodily injuries, and (b) in the alternative, the trial *562court erred in not granting Traders & General Insurance Company indemnity over against American for such amounts as it may have to pay under the judgment of the court.

The Court of Civil Appeals, in effect, has sustained both points, although its holding that Traders & General’s policy afforded no coverage for…