Meyer v. Allstate Insurance Co. of Canada, (1980) 3 Man.R.(2d) 411 (CA)

• Judge: Freedman, C.J.M., Monnin and O'Sullivan, JJ.A.
• Court: Court of Appeal (Manitoba)
• Case Date: June 27, 1980
• Jurisdiction: Manitoba
• Citations: (1980), 3 Man.R.(2d) 411 (CA)

Meyer v. Allstate Ins. Co. of Can. (1980), 3 Man.R.(2d) 411 (CA)

MLB headnote and full text

Meyer v. Allstate Insurance Company of Canada

Indexed As: Meyer v. Allstate Insurance Co. of Canada

Manitoba Court of Appeal

Freedman, C.J.M., Monnin and O'Sullivan, JJ.A.

June 27, 1980.

Summary:

This headnote contains no summary.

Insurance - Topic 3575

Accident and sickness insurance - The contract - Interpretation of terms - Injury - An insured's accident insurance policy stated that "'injury' means bodily injury caused by an accident ... which injury results ... directly and independently of all other causes, in ... dismemberment" - The insured injured her big toe - Subsequently, her toe and foot became gangrenous and infected, requiring the amputation of her leg below the knee - She suffered from arteriosclerosis and diabetes, which conditions together resulted in the injured toe becoming gangrenous - The gangrenous condition would likely have occurred even without the injury - The Manitoba Court of Queen's Bench in a judgment reported 3 Man.R.(2d) 49 dismissed the insured's action for the proceeds under the policy and held that the amputation of her leg was not an "injury" within the meaning of the policy, because it did not result "directly and independently of all other causes"; namely, arteriosclerosis and diabetes - The Manitoba Court of Appeal, Monnin, J.A., dissenting, allowed the appeal and held that the amputation of her leg was an injury within the meaning of the policy, because it resulted "directly and independently of all other causes" - The Court of Appeal held that arteriosclerosis and diabetes were merely causa sine qua non, and not the proximate cause or causa causans of the amputation.

Cases Noticed:

Fidelity and Casualty Company of New York v. Mitchell, [1971] A.C. 592, appld. [para. 15].

Battle v. Fidelity and Casualty Co. of New York (1923), 54 O.L.R. 24; 55 O.L.R. 330, appld. [para. 17].

Attridge v. Fidelity and Casualty Co. of New York, [1972] 3 W.W.R. 120, appld. [para. 19].

Robbins et al. v. Travelers Insurance Co. (1978), 19 O.R.(2d) 279, appld. [para. 20].

Harmon v. Travelers Insurance Co., [1936] 3 W.W.R. 545; [1937] 1 W.W.R. 424 (Alta. C.A.), consd. [para. 21].

Ward v. Aetna Life Insurance Co. (1909), 85 Neb. 471; 123 N.W. 456, consd. [para. 21].

Marks v. Commercial Travelers Mutual Accident Association (1956), 4 D.L.R.(2d) 113 (S.C.C.), consd. [para. 21].

Penn v. Standard Life Insurance Co. (1912), 76 S.E. 262, consd. [para. 21].

Maryland Casualty Co. v. Morrow (1914), 213 F. 599, consd. [para. 21].

Casey v. Continental Casualty Co., [1932] 3 W.W.R. revised [1933] 1 W.W.R. 282; [1934] S.C.R. 54, consd. [para. 27].

Tomlinson v. The Prudential Insurance Company v. America, [1954] O.R. 509, consd. [para. 27].

Bohaker v. Travelers Insurance Company (1913), 215 Mass.R. 32, consd. [para. 27].

Mutual Life Insurance Company of New York v. Loeb et al. (1913), 107 F. (2d) 7, consd. [para. 27].

Authors and Works Noticed:

Couch on Insurance (2nd Ed.), ss. 41:71 - 41:75 [para. 27].

MacGillivray on Insurance Law (5th Ed.), vol. 2, para. 1686 et seq. [para. 27].

Munkman, Note on the Causes of an Accidental Occurrence (1954), 17 Mod. L. Rev. 134, 137 [para. 12].

Counsel:

L. Green, for the plaintiff/appellant;

R.B. McNicol, for the defendant/respondent.

This case was heard on May 22, 1980, at Winnipeg, Manitoba, before FREEDMAN, C.J.M., MONNIN and O'SULLIVAN, JJ.A., of the Manitoba Court of Appeal.

On June 27, 1980, the judgment of the Court of Appeal was delivered and the following opinions were filed:

FREEDMAN, C.J.M. - see paragraphs 1 to 23;

MONNIN, J.A., dissenting - see paragraphs 24 to 31.

O'SULLIVAN, J.A., concurred with FREEDMAN, C.J.M.