State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance v. Waaga

Fifth Circuit

State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance v. Waaga

314 F.2d 343

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedMarch 14, 1963

DocketNo. 19946

StatusPublished

This text of 314 F.2d 343 (State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance v. Waaga) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance v. Waaga, 314 F.2d 343 (5th Cir. 1963).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The sole question presented is whether or not the automobile driven by the insured’s son at the time of the collision was furnished for the “regular use” either of the son or of the insured so as to be excluded from coverage under the following policy provision:

“INSURING AGREEMENT II DOES NOT APPLY:

“(1) to a non-owned automobile (a) * * *, (b) hired by or furnished to the named insured or a relative for regular use, or (c). * * * ”

After full findings of fact the district court held that the insurer “has not proved such exception to coverage by a preponderance of the evidence.” That conclusion was inescapable from the findings of fact, which were not “clearly erroneous.” Rule 52(a), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The judgment is therefore

Affirmed.

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