After jointly buying a horse in March 2004, Craig Harrison, et. al (Harrison) insure the two-year-old with Great American Assurance Company (Great American). Initially the horse was shown and rated on the policy as a racehorse.
Shortly after placing the horse with a racehorse trainer, the horse suffered an injury. At Harrison’s request and while the horse was recuperating, the horse’s rating classification was changed from racehorse to pleasure horse. The premium saved from the reclassification was applied to the policy’s premium. Harrison advised the agent that the horse would begin its racehorse training after recuperation.
In Oct. 2004, the horse’s trainer renewed its racehorse training and, later that month, the horse, suffered a broken shoulder. The trainer notified Harrison of the accident and told him he would update him after the horse was examined by a veterinarian. Harrison contacted his agent and told him to reclassify it as a racehorse, but he did not mention the horse’s injury. The horse, per the vet’s recommendation, was euthanized and Harrison filed a claim for the horse’s loss. The Harrisons sued when Great American denied the claim, stating that the policy covered a pleasure horse, not a race horse. The Harrisons appealed when the lower court ruled in favor of the insurer.
The higher court examined the Harrisons’ argument that the terms, racehorse and pleasure horse, are subject to more than one interpretation, so the policy wording was ambiguous. The court took note of testimony by a Great American Claims Manager that the insurer’s classifications were, in part, determined by a horse’s intended use and that racehorse training indicated a racehorse classification.
In the end, the court rejected the Harrisons’ argument that, at the time of the loss, the horse had yet been in an actual race and could be considered a pleasure horse too. The court agreed with the lower court’s reasoning, affirming in favor of Great American.
Craig Harrison, Gwen Harrison, Randall Reed and Marcel M. Weiner, Appellants v. Great American Assurance Company, Appelle. TXCTApp, Dallas. No.05-06-01028-CV June, 29, 20007. Affirmed. Westlaw, 227 S.W. 3d. 890
