Opinion ID: 3154926
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Ordinary Meaning of the Policy Terms

Text: [¶20] We begin our analysis by looking to the terms of the omnibus clause contained in Keizer’s commercial and umbrella policies, which provides that an insured includes “[a]nyone else while using with your permission a covered ‘auto’ you [Keizer] own.” Both the commercial and umbrella policies specify that words and phrases that appear in the policy in quotation marks have special meaning and are defined in the policy’s definitions section. The words own and permission, as used in the omnibus clause, do not 9 appear in quotation marks in either policy and the policies do not otherwise define the terms. We, therefore, in keeping with the Iowa rules of policy interpretation, give those terms their ordinary meaning. [¶21] The term own means “[t]o rightfully have or possess as property; to have legal title to.” Black’s Law Dictionary 1214 (9th ed. 2009). The term permission means “1. The act of permitting. 2. A license or liberty to do something; authorization.” Black’s Law Dictionary 1255 (9th ed. 2009). Based on the ordinary meaning of the terms own and permission, we agree with the district court’s conclusions that Keizer owned the trailer involved in Mr. Black’s accident and Mr. Black was using the trailer with Keizer’s permission. [¶22] With regard to Keizer’s ownership of the trailer, the Purchase Agreement states in clear terms, in two separate provisions, that Keizer was to remain the owner of all three trailers until the trailers were paid for in full. There is no dispute that the trailer had not been fully paid for when the accident occurred, and in fact all three trailers have since the accident been returned to Keizer’s possession.2 Because the trailers were not fully paid for when the accident occurred, the trailers were, under the Purchase Agreement’s plain terms, owned by Keizer. [¶23] CWIC acknowledges the ordinary meaning of the omnibus clause terms and the Purchase Agreement’s language concerning Keizer’s ownership of the trailer, but it offers two reasons this Court should nonetheless find Mr. Black to be the trailer's owner. First, CWIC argues the transaction between Keizer and Mr. Black was a conditional sales agreement, and under this type of transaction, the law dictates that the buyer is the vehicle's owner. Second, CWIC argues that the Iowa owner consent statute applies and requires a finding that Mr. Black was the owner of the trailer involved in the accident. 2 It is not clear from the record precisely when the three trailers were returned to Keizer or what the circumstances were of their return to Keizer. Mr. Black testified: Q. Okay. And the trailers also under the separate contracts, those have been returned? A. Everything’s returned. Q. And you’re being sued on those? A. No. Q. Okay. A. As far as I know to this point, Utility is not going to sue us. From what I understood from John, they pretty much sold them and broke even. Q. Are we talking about [Keizer] now? A. [Keizer], yes.