Legal Opinion

Closser v. Penn Mutual Fire Insurance

Supreme Court of Delaware

Decided February 8, 1983PublishedCited by 24 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

HORSEY, Justice:

This appeal raises a single issue — the timeliness of an insured’s suit against his insurer to recover his portion of policy benefits from a fire loss on covered property owned in part by the insured.

Plaintiff, Raymond Closser, appeals Superior Court’s grant of summary judgment to defendant, Penn Mutual Fire Insurance Company (hereafter “Penn Mutual” or “the insurer”). Summary judgment was granted on basically two grounds: (1) that the suit was time barred by the policy’s twelve month suit limitation provision; and (2) that Closser had failed to meet his burden of proving…

2Cases cited30 opinions

  1. Steigler v. Insurance Co. of North AmericaSupreme Court of Delaware · 1978
  2. Peloso v. Hartford Fire Insurance Co.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1970
  3. Tom Thomas Organization, Inc. v. Reliance InsuranceMichigan Supreme Court · 1976
  4. Vanaman Ex Rel. Vanaman v. Milford Memorial Hospital, Inc.Supreme Court of Delaware · 1970
  5. Proc v. Home InsuranceNew York Court of Appeals · 1966

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

3Cited by24 opinions

  1. Merrimack Mutual Fire Insurance Co. v. BattsCourt of Appeals of Tennessee · 2001
  2. Moore v. Mutual of Enumclaw InsuranceOregon Supreme Court · 1993
  3. Oglesby v. Penn Mutual Life InsuranceDistrict Court, D. Delaware · 1995
  4. Pvi, Inc., and William G. Skelly v. Ratiopharm Gmbh, a German CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2001
  5. Marshburn v. AssociatEd Indemnity Corp.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1987

19 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