Legal Opinion · Dissent

Howard v. Motorists Mutual Insurance

Kentucky Supreme Court

Decided June 19, 1997No. 95-SC-944-DGPublished

1DissentCooper, Justice

Respectfully, I must dissent.

The majority opinion leaves the impression that Motorists Mutual issued only one policy of insurance to Appellant; and that in each instance in which a late payment was accepted, it was given retroactive application so that there were never any periods in which she was uninsured. In fact, four separate policies were issued to Appellant, all of which lapsed because of nonpayment; never was a late payment applied retroactively to reinstate a lapsed policy; and on three occasions, she was uninsured for a period of time before a new policy was issued. On two…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. Steelvest, Inc. v. Scansteel Service Center, Inc.Kentucky Supreme Court · 1991
  2. Counties Contracting and Construction Company, Debtor-In-Possession v. Constitution Life Insurance CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1988
  3. Harris v. Criterion InsuranceSupreme Court of Virginia · 1981
  4. Equitable Life Assurance Society v. BrewerCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1928
  5. Prudential Insurance Co. of America v. NessmithCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1985

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

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

Powered by the Exa API