Case Title: Congdon v. Automobile Club Insurance Co.

Citation: 174 Vt. 586, 816 A.2d 504

Docket Number: 

State: vermont

Court: Vermont Supreme Court

Date: 2002-11-08T00:00:00Z

Document:
Congdon v. Automobile Club Insurance Co. (2001-476); 174 Vt. 586;
816 A.2d 504

[Filed 08-Nov-2002]

                                 ENTRY ORDER

                      SUPREME COURT DOCKET NO. 2001-476

                             OCTOBER TERM, 2002


  Lucas Congdon	                       }	APPEALED FROM:
                                       }
                                       }
       v.	                       }	Washington Superior Court
                                       }	
  Automobile Club Insurance Company    }
                                       }	DOCKET NO. 609-11-98 Wncv

                                                Trial Judge: Alan W. Cheever

             In the above-entitled cause, the Clerk will enter:

       Plaintiff Lucas Congdon appeals a grant of summary judgment in favor
  of defendant, the Automobile Club Insurance Company, in which the
  Washington Superior Court rejected plaintiff's contentions that the
  Automobile Club Insurance policy (the AAA policy) was ambiguous, and that
  he qualified as an "insured" under the policy held by his mother's
  "domestic partner."  In the absence of any ambiguity in the policy
  provisions defining the covered parties, we hold that the AAA policy should
  not be construed to extend coverage to the son of the policy holder's
  "domestic partner," and accordingly, affirm.

       In July 1996, two days after registering his recently purchased Suzuki
  motorcycle, plaintiff was struck by an uninsured motorist at the
  intersection of Routes 302 and 2 in Montpelier.  At the time of his
  accident, plaintiff was 18 years old and resided in a home that his mother,
  Jane Werley, co-owned with Paul Boffa.  Boffa was the named insured on a
  policy issued by defendant insurance company.  

       As there are no facts in dispute, the question presented to this Court
  is whether plaintiff was insured under the AAA policy by virtue of his
  familial relationship with his mother, who was listed as an insured driver
  in the Declarations under Boffa's AAA policy.  Alternatively, plaintiff
  argues that the policy's definition of "family member," which includes ward
  or foster child, should be extended to include plaintiff, based on his
  mother's long relationship with Paul Boffa.  	
       					
       In reviewing a grant of summary judgment, this Court relies on the
  same standard applied by the trial court, and will affirm that court's
  decision "if there are no genuine issues of material fact and the moving
  party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law."  Granger v. Town of
  Woodford, 167 Vt. 610, 611,