American Mutual Insurance v. Duvall
Supreme Court of New Hampshire
1Per curiam
The primary question raised herein is whether a workmen’s compensation insurance carrier, which issues a policy limiting coverage to that provided under the workmen’s compensation law of Massachusetts, is required to furnish benefits to its insured’s injured employee who files for compensation under the law of New Hampshire. This question was left undecided by us in Skyline Painters, Inc. v. Travelers Ins. Co., 113 N.H. 336, 306 A.2d 759 (1973), but we now hold, for the reasons which follow below, that the carrier is so obligated, to the extent of its liability under the Massachusetts…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Kacur v. Employers Mutual Casualty Co.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1969
- Robert L. Molinar v. Western Electric CompanyCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1976
- McLaughlin's CaseMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1931
- Weinberg v. State Workmen's Insurance FundSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1951
- Lavoie's CaseMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1956
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Commercial Union Insurance v. Harleysville Mutual InsuranceCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland · 1996
- Sieman v. Postorino Sandblasting & Painting Co.Michigan Court of Appeals · 1981
- Smith & Chambers Salvage v. Insurance Management Corp.District Court, E.D. Washington · 1992
- Ajax Construction Company, Inc. v. Liberty Mutual Insurance CompanySupreme Court of Rhode Island · 2017
- Lenny Szarek, Inc. v. Maryland Casualty Co.Appellate Court of Illinois · 2005
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.