Legal Opinion

Murray v. Lititz Mutual Insurance

Superior Court of Delaware

Decided September 10, 1948No. 57PublishedCited by 14 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Layton, J.:

I find no ambiguity in the language of the clause under consideration. In the plainest of terms it requires that all actions by insureds for losses occasioned by fire be commenced within twelve months of the date of the fire.

Moreover, the very great weight of authority in the country is to the effect that provisions in insurance policies requiring actions for loss to be instituted within a time less than the period of limitations prescribed by statute are valid if the period provided for in the policy is reasonable. See 29 Am. Jur. Insurance, Sec. 1392, and cases there cited.…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Friedberg v. Insurance Co. of North AmericaMichigan Supreme Court · 1932
  2. Emory v. Glens Falls InsuranceSuperior Court of Delaware · 1908
  3. Downs v. German Alliance InsuranceSuperior Court of Delaware · 1906
  4. Nott v. National Fire InsuranceCity of New York Municipal Court · 1933

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. Camelot Excavating Co., Inc. v. St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1981
  2. Brandywine One Hundred Corp. v. Hartford Fire InsuranceDistrict Court, D. Delaware · 1975
  3. Closser v. Penn Mutual Fire InsuranceSupreme Court of Delaware · 1983
  4. Rumsey Electric Co. v. University of DelawareSupreme Court of Delaware · 1976
  5. Shaw v. Aetna Life Insurance Co.Superior Court of Delaware · 1978

9 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