Utah Home Fire Ins. Co. v. McCarty
Before: Kaus
KAUS, P. J.
The only question on this appeal is whether the Utah Home Fire Insurance Company (“Utah”) did or did not furnish uninsured motorists coverage to the defendant McCarty. The trial court held that it did. We agree.
When McCarty applied to automobile liability insurance he signed an endorsement form entitled “Waiver of Family Protection or Protection Against Uninsured Motorists Coverage. ’ ’ The form was then blank. When produced at the trial it read, in relevant part, as follows: “In consideration of a return premium of $—, the undersigned insured and the Company, in accordance with the provision of Section 11580.2(a) of the California Insurance Code which permits the insured and the Company so to agree, do agree that the provision of this policy covering damages for bodily injury which the insured may be entitled to recover from the owner or operator of an uninsured motor vehicle is hereby waived and is void and of no effect. ’ ’ The form also recites: ‘ ‘ This endorsement, effective Sept. 19, 1964, forms a part of policy No. 68780 issued to Weddie Lee MeCARTY ...” A line providing for the signature of an “Authorized Representative” was never used. The date, the policy number, the name of the insured and the hyphens after the dollar sign were
[894]
evidently filled in by someone at Utah. This form was retained by Utah.
A little later McCarty received his policy. The face sheet contains what are commonly called the “declarations.” Item 3 of the declarations reads as follows: "The insurance afforded is only with respect to such of the following coverages as are indicated by specific premium charge or charges. ’ ’ In a box below this language ten different coverages are set forth on separate lines. Premium charges appear only opposite the coverages for bodily injury and property damage liability
The body of the policy begins: “Utah . . . [ajgrees with the insured, named in the declarations made a part hereof, in consideration of the payment of the premium and in reliance upon the statements in the declarations and subject to all of the terms of this policy: ...” This preamble is then followed by lengthy definitions of the various coverages which would be provided by the policy if a premium were charged for the particular coverage. Part IV is entitled “Protection Against Uninsured Motorists.” It covers about fifty square inches of space.
More from California Court of Appeal
- People v. Hill (1998)
- In Re Autumn H. (1994)
- Nwosu v. Uba (2004)
- In Re Casey D. (1999)
- Santisas v. Goodin (1998)
- Cahill v. San Diego Gas & Electric Co. (2011)
- People v. Rivera (2015)
- People v. Barnett (1998)
- People v. Serrano (2012)
- Benach v. County of Los Angeles (2007)