Legal Opinion

Prudential Property & Casualty Insurance. Co. v. Mardanlou

Utah Supreme Court

Decided February 13, 1980No. 16126PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

WILKINS, Justice:

This is an action by plaintiff for declaratory relief pursuant to § 78-33-1, et seq., Utah Code Annotated, 1953, seeking to render void and have rescinded a renter’s (homeowner’s) policy because of material misrepresentations made by the defendant when applying for said insurance. After a non-jury trial, the District Court of Salt Lake County determined that the policy of insurance was void, rescinded the policy, and entered a judgment providing that plaintiff was relieved from any further obligation to the defendant, who appealed. Affirmed. Costs to plaintiff.

The facts here…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Bearden v. Countryside Casualty CompanyMissouri Court of Appeals · 1961
  2. Robinson v. National Automobile & Casualty InsuranceCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1955
  3. Moore v. Prudential Insurance Company of AmericaUtah Supreme Court · 1971
  4. Burnham v. Bankers Life & Casualty CompanyUtah Supreme Court · 1970
  5. Violin v. Fireman's Fund InsuranceNevada Supreme Court · 1965

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Berger v. Minnesota Mutual Life Insurance Co.Utah Supreme Court · 1986
  2. Golden Rule Insurance v. HughesDistrict Court, D. Utah · 1992

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

Powered by the Exa API