Prosk v. Allstate Insurance
Appellate Court of Illinois
1Opinion of the Court
MR. PRESIDING JUSTICE MURPHY
delivered the opinion of the court.
Plaintiffs seek coverage under the uninsured motorist provision of their insurance policy and a declaration that the policy’s definition of “hit-and-run automobile” is null and void to the extent that it requires physical contact between the unidentified automobile and the automobile which the insured is occupying. The court allowed defendant’s motion for judgment on the pleadings and a stipulation. Plaintiffs appeal.
Plaintiffs’ policy was dated February 27, 1964, and the complaint alleged that on January 3, 1965, while plaintiff,…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Konrad v. Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co.Appellate Court of Illinois · 1956
- Canadian Radium & Uranium Corp. v. Indemnity Insurance Co. of North AmericaIllinois Supreme Court · 1952
- People Ex Rel. Nelson v. Olympic Hotel Building Corp.Illinois Supreme Court · 1950
3Cited by69 opinions
- United Services Automobile Ass'n AppealSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1974
- Amidzich v. Charter Oak Fire InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1969
- Indiana Insurance v. Noble Ex Rel. JordanIndiana Court of Appeals · 1970
- Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co. v. NovakWashington Supreme Court · 1974
- Higgins v. Nationwide Mutual Insurance CompanySupreme Court of Alabama · 1973
64 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.