Court Opinion

ID: 9674413
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-24 04:28:17.17353+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:16:27.509210
License: Public Domain

HAWTHORNE, Justice
(dissenting).
Under the undisputed facts of this case Daniel Taylor is not an insured within the clear and unambiguous provisions of the policy issued to his father, Garnie Taylor, a resident of Camden, Arkansas.
The pertinent provisions of the policy read:
“* * * * the unqualified word 'insured’ includes (1) the named in*267sured, and also includes (2) his relatives * * *.
“ ‘Relative’ means a relative of the named insured who is a resident of the same household.”
The facts disclose that Daniel Taylor left his father’s home in Camden, Arkansas, to get a job and earn his own living, and at the time of the accident he was working with and for his uncle, Archie Taylor, in whose home he lived at Pineville, Louisiana; and it was his intention to remain with his uncle for an indefinite period.
Under these facts Daniel was not a resident of the “household” of the named insured, Garnie Taylor. The word “household” has a definite and unambiguous meaning, as follows:
“Household * * * 2. Those who dwell under the same roof and compose a family * * Webster’s New International Dictionary (1938).
The majority has completely written out of the contract of insurance the term “household”.
I respectfully dissent.