There appears to be no dispute that there was a collision, the cow was not insured at the time of the collision, and that the cow caused the collision. The dispute in this case is whether the cow was a "land motor vehicle" as defined in the policy. While a cow is designed for operation on land, we do not believe a cow is a "motor vehicle." The policy at issue does not seperately define "motor vehicle," therefore we must look to the common, ordinary meaning of this term.
... about people who take literary analysis a tad too seriously.
I was wandering around leonardcohenfiles.com this morning and ran across an essay on The Future and figured I'd read it.
I got to this part: