Legal Opinion
Hanover Insurance v. Fireman's Fund Insurance
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Decided February 5, 1991No. 14083PublishedCited by 56 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtPeters, C. J.
This appeal concerns the right of an insurer who has paid a fire loss to its insured to recover one half of its payment from a second insurer on a theory either of subrogation or of contribution. The plaintiff, Hanover Insurance Company (Hanover), filed suit against the named defendant, Fireman’s Fund Insurance Company (Fireman’s), and the Thomas Minogue Agency (Minogue),1 seeking reimbursement for moneys it had paid on a fire loss suffered by its insured, Anthony’s Auto Body, Inc. (Anthony’s). The complaint alleged that Fireman’s had bound insurance coverage on Anthony’s prior to the date of…
2Cases cited35 opinions
- Pandolphe's Auto Parts, Inc. v. Town of ManchesterSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1980
- Blancato v. Feldspar Corp.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1987
- Rowe v. GodouSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1988
- Kaplan v. Merberg Wrecking CorporationSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1965
- Novella v. Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1972
30 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by56 opinions
- Heyman Associates No. 1 v. Insurance Co. of PennsylvaniaSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1995
- Bouchard v. People's BankSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1991
- Protect Hamden/North Haven from Excessive Traffic & Pollution, Inc. v. Planning & Zoning CommissionSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1991
- Lees v. Middlesex InsuranceSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1991
- Middlesex Mutual Assurance Co. v. WalshSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1991
51 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.