Legal Opinion

Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co. v. Creasy

Tennessee Supreme Court

Decided December 1, 1975PublishedCited by 33 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

HENRY, Justice.

This appeal stems from an uninsured motorist provision of an automobile liability insurance policy, and presents the single question of the necessity for strict compliance with a closed-end time limitation governing notice to the insurer.

The trial judge sustained Hartford’s motion for a summary judgment, in effect holding that there must be strict compliance. The Court of Appeals (W.S.) held that respondent was a third party donee beneficiary and that his lack of knowledge of the existence of the insurance coverage excused delay in compliance with the notice provisions…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Phoenix Cotton Oil Co. v. Royal Indemnity Co.Tennessee Supreme Court · 1918
  2. Barfield v. Insurance Company of North AmericaCourt of Appeals of Tennessee · 1968
  3. Spradlin v. Columbia Ins. Co. of New YorkCourt of Appeals of Tennessee · 1950
  4. Hamill v. Nationwide Mutual Insurance Co.Court of Appeals of Tennessee · 1972

3Cited by33 opinions

  1. Ferrando v. Auto-Owners Mutual InsuranceOhio Supreme Court · 2002
  2. McKimm v. BellTennessee Supreme Court · 1990
  3. Lawler v. Government Employees Ins. Co.Mississippi Supreme Court · 1990
  4. Hospital Underwriting Group, Inc. v. Summit Health Ltd., Sarahmarge Crigler, Cross-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1995
  5. State v. RodneyMissouri Court of Appeals · 1988

28 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