Southeastern Fidelity Insurance v. Stevens
Court of Appeals of Georgia
1Opinion of the Court
Deen, Presiding Judge.
It is first contended that the death did not arise out of the use or operation of the truck. This clause, a common one in motor vehicle insurance policies, has been subject to construction in other states, and it is usually interpreted in a broad sense for the usual reasons: that it is ambiguous, or should be construed in favor of the insured, or against the party drafting it, and the burden of proving an exclusion is on the insurer. Carter v. Bergeron, 102 N. H. 464 (160 A2d 348), follows the majority rule in holding that the term "arising out of’ does not mean…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- McCarty v. National Life & Accident InsuranceCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1962
- Travelers Insurance Co. v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co.Tennessee Supreme Court · 1973
- Carter v. BergeronSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1960
3Cited by61 opinions
- Shinabarger v. Citizens Mutual InsuranceMichigan Court of Appeals · 1979
- Wendell v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceMontana Supreme Court · 1999
- Cameron Mutual Insurance Co. v. WardMissouri Court of Appeals · 1980
- Willard v. KelleySupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1990
- Washington v. Hartford Accident & Indemnity CompanyCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1982
56 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.