Legal Opinion · Dissent

Griffith v. Security Insurance

Supreme Court of Connecticut

Decided January 14, 1975Published

1DissentBogdanski, J.

The majority opinion apparently holds that the term “household” is unambiguous and means “those who dwell under the *460same roof.”1 I cannot agree. That interpretation may have adverse consequences for a significant segment of our population. Recent statistics show that for every three marriages occurring in Connecticut today, one marriage is ending in divorce. United States Bureau of the Census, “Statistical Abstract of the United States: 1974” (95th Ed.), p. 67. To follow the majority’s narrow definition of household without regard for varying factual situations will strip many such broken…

2Cases cited23 opinions

  1. Mazzilli v. Acc. & Cas. Ins. Co. of WinterthurSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1961
  2. Dickinson v. Maryland Casualty Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1924
  3. Taylor v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1965
  4. Cal-Farm Insurance v. BoisserancCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1957
  5. Raffel v. Travelers Indemnity Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1954

18 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