Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. v. Cartmel

Citations

• 87 Fla. 495
• 100 So. 802

Syllabus

<p>1. The rule for the construction and interpretation of insurance contracts is that the policy must be liberally construed in favor of the insured So as not to defeat, without a plain necessity his claim to the indemnity which, in making the insurance, it was his object to secure. , ¡</p> <p>2. While insurance contracts should be construed most strongly against the insurer, yet language used in a policy of insurance is to be given its popular and usual significance unless the context requires a different construction.</p> <p>3. The word “collision” used in a contract of insurance indemnifying the insured against loss to an automobile described in the policy from collision with another hbject, either moving or stationary, means the act of colliding; and imports striking together; violent contact.</p> <p>4. A contract of insurance indemnified the owner against l'oss or damage sustained to an automobile described “if caused solely by collision with another object, either moving or stationary.” In an action 'on the policy it was proved 'at the trial that “all of a sudden” the roadbed “gave way under the car” and it “went down in soft sand” and “stuck.” Held: Not a “collision” within the meaning of the term as employed in the policy.</p>