Legal Opinion
Cropper v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance
Superior Court of Delaware
Decided May 31, 1995No. C.A. 94C-10-025PublishedCited by 18 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
RIDGELY, President Judge.
Plaintiffs Gary J. Cropper and Debbie I. Cropper (“Croppers”) have filed a complaint for declaratory judgment alleging that they are entitled to uninsured motorist benefits from the Defendant State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. (“State Farm”) under the contractual provisions of their policy and the statutory provisions of 18 Del.C. § 3902 as a result of an October 3, 1993 collision with a National Guard vehicle that was uninsured. The Croppers have moved for summary judgment contending that as a matter of law they are entitled to benefits, notwithstanding State…
2Cases cited26 opinions
- Burkhart v. DaviesSupreme Court of Delaware · 1991
- Frank v. Horizon Assurance Co.Supreme Court of Delaware · 1989
- Higgins v. Nationwide Mutual Insurance CompanySupreme Court of Alabama · 1973
- Karlson v. City of Oklahoma CitySupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1985
- State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance v. AbramowiczSupreme Court of Delaware · 1978
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by18 opinions
- Boradiansky v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceNew Mexico Supreme Court · 2007
- Borjas v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co.Colorado Court of Appeals · 2001
- Nationwide Mutual Insurance Co v. HatfieldKentucky Supreme Court · 2003
- Jenkins v. City of ElkinsWest Virginia Supreme Court · 2012
- Ohio Casualty Group of Insurance Companies v. Chavez, Texas Court of Appeals, 14th District (Houston)1997
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.