Legal Opinion
Hotkowski v. Aetna Life & Casualty Co.
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Decided December 8, 1992No. 14498PublishedCited by 25 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtPeters, C. J.
As in the companion case of McGlinchey v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co., 224 Conn. 133, 617 A.2d 445 (1992), which we have also released today, the principal issue in this appeal is the enforceability of a provision in a contract for uninsured or underinsured motorists coverage that requires the insured to initiate collection proceedings within a two year period from the occurrence of an automobile accident. The plaintiff, Henry Hotkowski (insured), filed an action alleging that he had a right to recover underinsured motorist benefits pursuant to an insurance contract issued by the defendant,…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. v. MurphySupreme Court of Connecticut · 1988
- Nationwide Insurance v. GodeSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1982
- Covenant Insurance v. CoonSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1991
- Simonette v. Great American InsuranceSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1973
- American Motorists Insurance v. GouldSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1990
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by25 opinions
- Orkney v. Hanover InsuranceSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1999
- Florestal v. Government Employees InsuranceSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1996
- Serrano v. Aetna InsuranceSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1995
- Bayusik v. Nationwide Mutual InsuranceSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1995
- Smith v. Safeco Insurance Co. of AmericaSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1993
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.