Legal Opinion
United States v. Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co.
District Court, E.D. California
Decided November 13, 1970No. Civ. No. S-1329PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
MacBRIDE, Chief Judge.
This case, arising on cross motions for summary judgment, contains a set of stipulated facts and issues. On May 14, 1967, a woman named Fusae Rogers was injured in an automobile accident with an uninsured motorist. She received treatment at Oak Knoll Naval Hospital, and later settled with her own insurance carrier, Hartford, under uninsured motorist coverage.1 In April, 1968, the United States submitted a claim to Hartford under the Federal Medical Care Recovery Act. 42 U.S.C. §§ 2651-*65053, for the amounts expended in the treatment of Fusae Rogers.…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- United States v. SummerlinSupreme Court of the United States · 1940
- Williams v. Los Angeles Metropolitan Transit AuthorityCalifornia Supreme Court · 1968
- United States v. Andrew GeraCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1969
- Pacific Indemnity Co. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1966
- Firemen's Insurance v. DiskinCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1967
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Transnational Insurance Company v. SimmonsCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1973
- United States v. Hartford Accident and Indemnity Company, a CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1972
- Tara v. California State Automobile Ass'nCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1979