Introducing ATLASLearn more
Legal Opinion

Kates v. Workmen's Auto Insurance

California Court of Appeal

Decided May 10, 1996No. B081666PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

EPSTEIN, Acting P. J.

Does Insurance Code section 660 extend the period of an automobile policy written with a three-month term when the insured fails to pay the premium on time after a warning that coverage will expire unless the premium is paid? We conclude that it does not. Since the trial court ruled that coverage is extended in this situation, we reverse.

Factual and Procedural Summary

This action was tried on stipulated facts and we take our summary from the stipulation of the parties. The policy at issue was purchased by Gordon Dreyer in November 1984 from Workmen’s Auto Insurance…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Dyna-Med, Inc. v. Fair Employment & Housing CommissionCalifornia Supreme Court · 1987
  2. Quintano v. Mercury Casualty Co.California Supreme Court · 1995
  3. Pruyn v. Agricultural InsuranceCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1995
  4. National Automobile & Casualty Insurance v. California Casualty InsuranceCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1983
  5. Webb v. MaynardSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1995

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. MacKey v. Bristol West Insurance Service of California, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2003
  2. Stenson v. Northland InsuranceConnecticut Appellate Court · 1996

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

View API DocsGet API Key

Powered by the Exa API