Legal Opinion
Catt Michele Huth, an Individual v. The Hartford Insurance Company of the Midwest, an Indiana Corporation
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided July 30, 2002No. 01-16294PublishedCited by 52 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
LAY, Circuit Judge.
On October 31, 2000, Hartford Insurance Company filed a federal declaratory judgment action seeking a declaration that Catt Michele Huth is not entitled to under-insured motorist benefits under her mother’s policy because she was not a resident of her mother’s household at the time of her automobile accident. On November 8, 2000, Huth filed a similar declaratory judgment action in Arizona state court claiming she is entitled to benefits. Hartford removed the state action to federal district court on the basis of diversity jurisdiction. 28 U.S.C. § 1332 (2002). The…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Colorado River Water Conservation District v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Wilton v. Seven Falls Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1995
- Quackenbush v. Allstate InsuranceSupreme Court of the United States · 1996
- Brillhart v. Excess Insurance Co. of AmericaSupreme Court of the United States · 1942
- Public Affairs Associates, Inc. v. RickoverSupreme Court of the United States · 1962
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by52 opinions
- Emma C. Lively v. Wild Oats Markets, Inc., a Delaware CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2006
- RR Street & Co. Inc. v. Transport Ins. Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2011
- Sherwin-Williams Co. v. Holmes CountyCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2003
- Admiral Ins. Co. v. Niagara Transformer Corp.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2023
- Keown v. Tudor InsuranceDistrict Court, D. Hawaii · 2008
47 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.