Issue: The insured’s son was driving an intoxicated friend home in his father’s car, but decided to stop at a bar for a drink on the way and he left his friend in the car. As the son was coming out of the bar, he fell and broke his leg and was taken to the hospital. Apparently no one was told about the friend in the car. The friend was left in the car overnight, and died as a result of exposure to the 20 degree weather. His widow brought a wrongful death action and recovered judgment against the insured, and then sought to recover the judgment from the insured’s Homeowners insurance company.

Judgment: The trial court ruled in favor of the widow, and the Homeowners insurance company appealed. The company pointed out that its policy excluded injuries involving the use of a motor vehicle. The court ruled that, in this instance, death resulted not from the use of the automobile but from the negligence of the insured’s son. Therefore, the company was liable.

As to the company’s duty to defend the insured in such an action, the court again ruled that it had a duty to defend, since a perusal of the complaint would have shown that the primary point at issue was the negligence of the insured’s son in leaving his friend out in the cold.

The judgment rendered in the trial court was in excess of the maximum limit of the policy, and on this point the court reversed the judgment of the lower court, since Minnesota’s policy in such cases is to disallow recovery in excess of the policy limits.

Engeldinger vs. State Automobile and Casualty Underwriters – Minnesota Supreme Court – November 14 9, 1975 – Insurance Law Journal, Vol. 636, Page 55. (Rough Notes Magazine April 1976).