This evidence supports the trial court's findings in Raymond's favor. We are not prepared to say that taking a friend or relative from Oakland to her home in Grass Valley is not a 'normal use' of a passenger car when it is in good working condition. Nor can we say as a matter of law that that term changes its meaning when the car gets into such a state of disrepair that it becomes imprudent for the owner to use it on such a trip, especially an owner who exerted the efforts this owner did to restore his car to normal capacity.
Nor can we say as a matter of law that the Mercury was not 'withdrawn' from normal use because of its 'breakdown.' There it stood in the driveway, locked and unused during the period of the use of the 'substitute' Ford and until taken to a garage for further repair.
We concur in the views expressed in an opinion filed by Honorable Richard H. Chamberlain who presided at the trial of this case: 'Was the Ford car being 'temporarily used' as a substitute for the Mercury car specified in the policy and was the Mercury 'withdrawn from normal service because of its breakdown'?
