Legal Opinion

Ruckdaschel v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co.

Montana Supreme Court

Decided November 13, 1997No. 97-194PublishedCited by 31 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Trieweiler

The plaintiffs, Tami and David Ruckdaschel, brought this action against the defendant, State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co., in the District Court for the Second Judicial District in Silver Bow County to obtain coverage for medical payments pursuant to their policies with State Farm. Both parties moved for summary judgment. The District Court granted the Ruckdaschels’ motion as it pertained to coverage issues, and held that genuine issues of material fact exist regarding other claims. State Farm appeals from the District Court’s order. We affirm the judgment of the District Court.

The…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Bruner v. Yellowstone CountyMontana Supreme Court · 1995
  2. Motarie v. Northern Montana Joint Refuse Disposal DistrictMontana Supreme Court · 1995
  3. Mead v. M.S.B., Inc.Montana Supreme Court · 1994
  4. Bennett v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceMontana Supreme Court · 1993
  5. Sullivan v. DoeMontana Supreme Court · 1972

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

3Cited by31 opinions

  1. Kristine E. Lierboe, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company, a CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2003
  2. Wendell v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceMontana Supreme Court · 1999
  3. Shamrock Motors, Inc. v. Ford Motor Co.Montana Supreme Court · 1999
  4. Farmers Alliance Mutual Insurance v. HolemanMontana Supreme Court · 1998
  5. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance v. GibsonMontana Supreme Court · 2007

26 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