Legal Opinion

St. Paul Fire & Marine Insurance v. American Home Assurance Co.

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided March 1, 1994No. Docket Nos. 95632, 95633, (Calendar No. 6)PublishedCited by 33 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMallett, J.

This is an action among three insurance companies: St. Paul Fire & Marine Insurance Company, Continental Casualty Company, plaintiffs-appellants, and American Home Assurance Company, defendant-appellee. In this consolidated appeal, we granted leave to decide the legal effect to be given plaintiff-appellants’ pro-rata "other insurance” clause and defendant-appellee’s excess "other insurance” clause contained in their respective malpractice insurance policies.

More specifically, we must determine whether to adopt the Lamb-Weston doctrine 1 that views all "other insurance” clauses as…

2Cases cited21 opinions

  1. Lamb-Weston, Inc. v. Oregon Automobile InsuranceOregon Supreme Court · 1959
  2. Auto-Owners Insurance v. ChurchmanMichigan Supreme Court · 1992
  3. Upjohn Co. v. New Hampshire InsuranceMichigan Supreme Court · 1991
  4. Group Insurance v. CzopekMichigan Supreme Court · 1992
  5. Federal Kemper Insurance v. Health Insurance Administration, Inc.Michigan Supreme Court · 1986

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

3Cited by33 opinions

  1. John Michael McGow v. Billy Joe McCurryCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2005
  2. King v. Ford Motor Credit Co.Michigan Court of Appeals · 2003
  3. Gelman Sciences, Inc. v. Fidelity & Casualty Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1998
  4. Federal Insurance Company v. The Hartford Steam Boiler Inspection And Insurance CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2005
  5. Zurich-American Insurance v. Amerisure InsuranceMichigan Court of Appeals · 1996

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