Fieser v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance

502 P.2d 837, 210 Kan. 418
CourtSupreme Court of Kansas
DecidedNovember 4, 1972
Docket46,602
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 502 P.2d 837 (Fieser v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Kansas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Fieser v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance, 502 P.2d 837, 210 Kan. 418 (kan 1972).

Opinion

Per Curiam:

The appellant was paid by the defendant insurance company the amount of medical benefits available on account of injury sustained while occupying the Pontiac automobile covered by a liability insurance policy and described in the policy as the “Owned Motor Vehicle.”

The appellant had separate liability insurance policies with the defendant company with similar medical benefit provisions covering two other automobiles which he owned. His total medical expenses were more than the amount received from the insurance on the occupied vehicle. He sues to recover the balance on the strength of the other policies.

The trial court denied the claim, holding that the language of the policies was clear and unambiguous in excluding liability except for injuries sustained while occupying the “Owned Motor Vehicle” as defined in the policies.

Appellant relies on Lavin v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Ins. Co., 193 Kan. 22, 391 P. 2d 992, and other decisions. While this appeal was pending this court handed down its decision in Simpson v. KFB Insurance Co., Inc., 209 Kan. 620, 498 P. 2d 71, denying recovery for medical expenses under policy provisions like those involved here and distinguishing the Lavin case.

Simpson v. KFB Insurance Co., Inc., supra, supports the trial court’s judgment and is controlling in the disposition of this appeal. The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Alabama Farm Bureau Mutual Casualty Insurance v. Williams
365 So. 2d 315 (Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama, 1978)
ALA. FARM BUR. MUT. CAS. INS. CO. v. Williams
365 So. 2d 315 (Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama, 1978)
Fieser v. St. Francis Hospital & School of Nursing, Inc.
510 P.2d 145 (Supreme Court of Kansas, 1973)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
502 P.2d 837, 210 Kan. 418, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/fieser-v-state-farm-mutual-automobile-insurance-kan-1972.