Legal Opinion
Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co. v. Ace American Reinsurance Co.
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Decided April 12, 2007No. SC 17625PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
BORDEN, J.
The primary issue in this appeal 1 is the proper construction of the phrase “any one accident” as used in a series of reinsurance contracts between the plaiutiffs, Hartford Accident and Indemnity Company and several of its affiliates (Hartford), 2 and the defendants, certain reinsurers. 3 Hartford brought this action for a declaratory judgment, claiming, inter alia, that it was entitled to recover under the reinsurance contracts with the defendants for certain losses on general liability insurance policies issued by Hartford to the MacArthur Company (MacArthur) arising from…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Frontier Insulation Contractors, Inc. v. Merchants Mutual InsuranceNew York Court of Appeals · 1997
- Commercial Union Insurance v. Porter Hayden Co.Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · 1997
- Buell Industries, Inc. v. Greater New York Mutual InsuranceSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2002
- Fibreboard Corp. v. Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co.California Court of Appeal · 1993
- Metropolitan Life Insurance v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 2001
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Zulick v. Patrons Mutual InsuranceSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2008
- Employers Reinsurance Co. v. Massachusetts Mutual Life InsuranceCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2011
- Munich Reinsurance America, Inc. v. American National InsuranceDistrict Court, D. New Jersey · 2014
- Fiallo v. Allstate InsuranceConnecticut Appellate Court · 2012
- Munich Reinsurance America, Inc. v. American National InsuranceDistrict Court, D. New Jersey · 2012
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.