Case Name: Colby DUPLIN, et al. v. STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY
Court: Louisiana Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Louisiana
Decision Date: 1990-03-01
Citations: 559 So. 2d 146
Docket Number: No. W90-111
Parties: Colby DUPLIN, et al. v. STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY.
Judges: 
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 559
Pages: 146–147

Head Matter:
Colby DUPLIN, et al. v. STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY.
No. W90-111.
Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Third Circuit.
March 1, 1990.
Rehearing Denied April 11, 1990.
Charles V. Guilbault and Daryl J. Daigle, Courtnay, Forstall, Guilbault, Hunter & Fontana, New Orleans, for defendant-applicant.
David R. Rabalais, Hill & Beyer, Jimmy Genovese, Opelousas, for plaintiff-respondent.
Melissa Reardon, Randy Serrett, Matthew Hill, Mike Langrave, Lafayette, for defendant.

Opinion:
WRIT GRANTED AND MADE PEREMPTORY:
The trial court erred in denying the motion for summary judgment filed by Nautilus Insurance Company. There is no serious dispute of fact that relator's insured, Mako's bar, is engaged in the business of selling and serving alcoholic beverages. Opposing argument notwithstanding, any liability of Mako's in the instant suit must necessarily stem from the fact that Mako's is in the business of selling and serving alcohol. Exclusion (h) of relator's policy issued to Mako's excludes from coverage damages for which Mako's is held liable as an organization engaged in the business of manufacturing, distributing, selling, or serving alcoholic beverages. Accordingly, the trial court erred in finding this language ambiguous and in failing to grant relator's motion for summary judgment. See Morrison v. Miller, 452 So.2d 390 (La.App. 3rd Cir.1984).
IT IS ORDERED that the trial court's judgment denying relator's motion for summary judgment be and the same is hereby reversed. All actions against relator are hereby dismissed with prejudice.