Court Opinion

ID: 9526513
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-07 03:19:11.651549+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:20:24.478750
License: Public Domain

SICKEL, J.
(concurring specially). The policy declares: “Item 1. The occupation or business of the named Insured is farmer. Item 5. The purposes for which the automobile is to be used are farm use.” The policy also provides: “This policy applies only to accidents which occur and to direct losses to the property insured which are sustained during the policy period while the automobile is * * * owned, maintained and used for the purposes stated as applicable thereto in the declarations.”
“Farm use” is the purpose specified in this policy and such use is a condition precedent to the right of recovery. However, these words do not imply that the truck may never be used for any other purpose. Terrasi v. Peirce, 304 Mass. 409, 23 N.E.2d 871. The use of the truck for obtaining repairs and parts for a combine to be used in harvesting respondent’s crops was a farm use, and the truck was being used for the purpose specified in the policy at the time of the collision. The use of the truck by respondent for the transportation of cattle to market for hire while holding a Class B carrier permit was not a farm use but significant is the fact the policy contains no provision to the effect that the insurer shall not be liable if damages are incurred while the truck is used for any other purpose than that specified in the policy. The controlling fact here is that the truck was being used for a farm purpose at the time of the collision, not that it was at the same time used for the transportation of property under a motor carriers permit.
I concur in the reversal of the judgment of the circuit court for the reasons stated above.