Legal Opinion
Bock v. Insurance Commissioner
Court of Special Appeals of Maryland
Decided November 13, 1990No. 153, September Term, 1990PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ALPERT, Judge.
We are called upon to decide whether the mailing of a protest against the non-renewal of an automobile insurance policy will satisfy the requirement that the protest be “filed” with the Insurance Commissioner.
Charles E. Bock, appellant, appeals from a judgment by the Circuit Court for Baltimore City, the Hon. Robert I.H. Hammerman presiding, in which the court affirmed the Maryland Insurance Commissioner’s decision to deny Bock’s request for a hearing on the nonrenewal of his automobile insurance policy. We reverse for the reasons set forth below.
FACTS
On September 14, 1988,…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- D & Y, INC. v. WinstonCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1990
- Border v. GroomsCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1972
- Kolker v. BiggsCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2001
- Levy v. Glens Falls Indemnity Co.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1956
- Waite v. DoeNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1985
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Benner v. Nationwide Mutual Insurance CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1996
- Shah v. HealthPlus, Inc.Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · 1997
- State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance v. Martin Marietta Corp.Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · 1995
- Wilson v. Baltimore City Police DepartmentCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland · 1992
- Benner v. Nationwide Mutual InsuranceCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1996
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.