Legal Opinion
Lane v. Metropolitan Property & Casualty Insurance
Connecticut Appellate Court
Decided December 7, 2010No. AC 31251PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
BEAR, J.
This appeal comes to us on a reservation of a legal issue pursuant to General Statutes § 52-235 1 and Practice Book § 73-1. 2 The stipulation of the parties presents one question for the advice of this court: “Whether an insured with two separate uninsured motorist insurance policies that cover the same vehicle for uninsured motorist benefits is barred from collecting the policy limits of both policies combined?” We answer the reserved question in the negative.
For purposes of this reservation, the parties stipulated to the following facts. In a September 12, 2006 motor vehicle…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- American Universal Insurance v. DelGrecoSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1987
- In re Valerie D.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1992
- Nationwide Insurance v. GodeSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1982
- Streitweiser v. Middlesex Mutual Assurance Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1991
- Covenant Insurance v. CoonSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1991
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- State v. KenvinSupreme Court of Vermont · 2011
- McDonough v. ForrestConnecticut Appellate Court · 2011
- Guarino v. Allstate Property & Casualty Insurance Co.Connecticut Appellate Court · 2013
- Stott v. Peerless InsuranceConnecticut Appellate Court · 2012