Legal Opinion

Orolin v. Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co.

District Court, D. Illinois

Decided February 14, 1984No. 81 C 5025PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

GETZENDANNER, District Judge:

This diversity action is before the court on defendant’s motion for summary judgment. For the reasons stated below, the court grants defendant’s motion.

Plaintiff Charlene Orolin alleges that the negligence of James C. Pate, the driver of another automobile, was the proximate cause of an automobile accident that occurred on November 25, 1980, in which she was injured. At the time of the collision, Orolin’s vehicle was insured by defendant, Hartford Accident and Indemnity Company (“Hartford”), and Orolin was a named insured. Orolin admits…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Erie Railroad v. TompkinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
  2. Holman v. All Nation Insurance Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1980
  3. O'Connor v. a & P EnterprisesIllinois Supreme Court · 1980
  4. Helen L. Huff, Administratrix of the Estate of Jessee Huff, Deceased v. White Motor CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1977
  5. Hastings v. United Pacific Insurance Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1982

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

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Silver v. SlusherSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1989
  2. Cloninger v. National General InsuranceIllinois Supreme Court · 1985
  3. Millers Mut. Ins. Ass'n of Illinois v. HouseAppellate Court of Illinois · 1997
  4. Krska v. Allstate Insurance Co.Appellate Court of Illinois · 1987
  5. Watson v. Hartford Casualty InsuranceAppellate Court of Illinois · 1990

7 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