Legal Opinion

Olmstead v. Hubert

Montana Supreme Court

Decided February 18, 1988No. 87-278Published

1Opinion of the CourtJustice McDONOUGH

The plaintiff was involved in a four vehicle accident. Two vehicles were insured, one was uninsured. Olmstead settled with the insured drivers and brought an action against the third, Steven E. Hubert, to establish liability in order to recover on his uninsured motorist coverage. The District Court, Eleventh Judicial District, Flathead County, Montana entered summary judgment against Olmstead holding that Hubert was not an uninsured motorist. We affirm.

The four vehicles involved in this accident were insured as follows:

Hansen, Vehicle No. 1, United Pacific

Hubert, Vehicle No. 2, no insurance

Olm…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Westfield Insurance v. Aetna Life & Casualty Co.Court of Appeals of Arizona · 1987

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

Powered by the Exa API