Jacobs Concessions, Inc. v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co.

Forsythe, J., delivered the opinion of the Court. The appellant, Jacobs Concessions, Inc., appeals from a judgment of the Baltimore City Court in favor of the appellee, United States Fidelity and Guaranty Company, a body corporate. The appellant was the holder of a public liability policy issued by the appellee to cover claims for damages for which the appellant legally would be liable arising from bodily injuries, or death, happening on the premises occupied by the appellant, and during the period covered by the policy. The appellant was engaged in operating under concessions, eight refreshment stands, and a commissary tent, on the Hagerstown Fair Grounds at Hagerstown, Maryland.

The premium of $10 for each of the stands, and $25 for the commissary tent, was paid. On the 9th day of September, 1937, according to the stipulation of facts filed in the case, together with the testimony of Charles Kaufman, while servicing the vari ¹¹⁵ ous refreshment stands, a truck was loaded at the commissary tent and proceeded on its way to deliver supplies to one of the stands on another part of the grounds. The truck had crossed over what commonly is known on fair grounds as the “Midway,” and proceeded along another way “intending to pass behind other concession stands” to one of the appellant’s stands located at another point on the Midway. After the truck had proceeded about thirty-five feet from the commissary tent it broke through a picket fence and injured four persons who were seated at a table within the inclosure of the fence, and on the premises of a concession operated by a brewery company.

Those persons later recovered judgments against the appellant. The agreed stipulation of facts, and the testimony of Kaufman, who was in charge of the truck, is not contradicted, thus presenting a case in which there is no issue as to the facts. The legal question presented by this appeal involves the construction of the terms of the policy issued by the appellee to the appellant. According to the terms of the policy, it was “to pay on behalf of the assured all claims for damages for which the assured is legally liable, arising from bodily injury (including death at any time resulting therefrom) suffered or alleged to have been suffered by any person during the policy period, on the premises or elsewhere and caused by the ownership, maintenance or use of the premises or by reason of the conduct on the premises of the assured’s business described in the schedule of statements.” The policy contains certain exclusions, the seventh of which provides that the policy did not cover “any loss or expense on account of claims arising from bodily injury * * * caused directly or indirectly elsewhere than on the premises.” Then, under the conditions of the policy a definition of the term premises is given as follows: “Whenever used in this policy the word ‘premises’ shall be understood ¹¹⁶ to mean the premises of the Assured (or part thereof) which are covered by the policy and described in the Schedule of Statements, including the sidewalks and other ways adjacent thereto.” The Schedule of Statements refers specifically to the premises covered as “Auto Parking and Refreshment Stands,” and by later indorsement one commissary tent.

The rate of insurance was based entirely on the number of stands, with a flat fee for auto parking. The question then presented is whether the accident in this case occurred on the premises of the appellant, or on a way adjacent thereto, in contemplation of the policy. The appellant contends that the way over which the truck was traveling after it had left the commissary tent, comes within the terms of the policy, principally because the course of the truck was within the Hagerstown Fair Grounds, and only a short distance from one of the concessions. The appellee, of course, contends that the accident did not happen on the appellant’s premises, or on a way adjacent thereto, and the lower court so held.

In construing what is meant by the words premises, and