Court Opinion

ID: 9745183
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 22:40:35.95061+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:24:57.380103
License: Public Domain

ARMSTRONG, J., Concurring.
I concur in the judgment.
As the opinion points out, plaintiff’s theory is that, because Triple Crown incorrectly filled out the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) paperwork, title never transferred to Kevin, Triple Crown was still the owner of the Blazer when the accident occurred, and therefore Kevin was insured as a permissive user of the Blazer under Mid-Century’s policy. This preliminary issue was not decided by the trial court. Therefore, discussion about other issues is premature. I agree that it cannot be established as a matter of law that Kevin was not covered by the policy if he was a permissive user. I also agree that there are triable issues of fact regarding the permissive use question and that the summary judgment should be reversed.