Legal Opinion
Yamaguchi v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided May 24, 1983No. 81-4107PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
FLETCHER, Circuit Judge:
This is a diversity action against an insurer to recover no-fault benefits under two Hawaii no-fault insurance policies. Defendant appeals from the trial court’s granting of plaintiffs’. motion for partial summary judgment of $100,000 against the defendant. 515 F.Supp. 186 (D.Haw.1981). The trial court ordered State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. (State Farm) to pay plaintiffs the $100,000 in total no-fault benefits available under two Hawaii no-fault insurance policies, each of which has an aggregate limit of coverage of $50,000. Defendant appeals on the ground…
2Cases cited23 opinions
- Oscar Mayer & Co. v. EvansSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
- Rodrigues v. StateHawaii Supreme Court · 1970
- Seatrain Shipbuilding Corp. v. Shell Oil Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1980
- Safeco Insurance Co. Of America v. William GuytonCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1982
- Wasche v. Milbank Mutual Insurance Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1978
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Yamaguchi v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1983
- Rana v. Bishop Ins. of Hawaii, Inc.Hawaii Intermediate Court of Appeals · 1985
- Rana v. Bishop Ins. of Hawaii, Inc.Hawaii Intermediate Court of Appeals · 1985