Legal Opinion

Transcontinental Insurance v. Washington Public Utilities Districts' Utility System

Washington Supreme Court

Decided August 18, 1988No. 54851-0PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Pearson, C.J. —

Transcontinental Insurance Company and Columbia Casualty Company brought this declaratory action to determine whether certain insurance policies issued to the Washington Public Utility Districts' Utility System (WPUDUS) provide coverage for potential liability arising out of the Washington Public Power Supply System's $2.25 billion bond default. The trial court held that under the allegations of the complaints, one policy provided coverage. We affirm that decision, but hold the complaints allege facts which, if proved, would also trigger the coverage of another policy. We…

2Cases cited24 opinions

  1. Haberman v. Washington Public Power Supply SystemWashington Supreme Court · 1988
  2. State Farm General Insurance v. EmersonWashington Supreme Court · 1984
  3. Morgan v. Prudential Insurance Co. of AmericaWashington Supreme Court · 1976
  4. Chemical Bank v. Washington Public Power Supply SystemWashington Supreme Court · 1984
  5. Villella v. Public Employees Mutual InsuranceWashington Supreme Court · 1986

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

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Transcontinental Ins. Co. v. WA. PUBLIC UTILITIES DISTRICTS'UTILITY SYSTEMWashington Supreme Court · 1988
  2. American Best Food v. Alea LondonWashington Supreme Court · 2010
  3. American Best Food, Inc. v. Alea London, Ltd.Washington Supreme Court · 2010
  4. Children's Friend & Service v. St. Paul Fire & Marine Insurance Co.Supreme Court of Rhode Island · 2006
  5. Certain Underwriters at Lloyd's, London v. Valiant InsuranceCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2010

1 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