Legal Opinion
Balagtas v. Bishop
Indiana Court of Appeals
Decided August 4, 2009No. 79A02-0903-CV-239PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
KIRSCH, Judge.
Federated Mutual Insurance Co. ("Federated") appeals from the trial court's order denying its motion for summary judgment and granting summary judgment in favor of Harry Joe Bishop ("Bishop") in his claim for underinsured motorist coverage. Federated presents the following restated issue for our review: whether the trial court erred in its interpretation of Indiana Code section 27-7-5-2 as requiring a named insured's election or rejection of uninsured or underinsured motorist ("UM/UIM") coverage to apply to all insureds.
We affirm.
FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY
Bishop was…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Indiana Insurance v. Noble Ex Rel. JordanIndiana Court of Appeals · 1970
- Board of School Commissioners v. PettigrewIndiana Court of Appeals · 2006
- American Family Mutual Insurance Co. v. Federated Mutual Insurance Co.Indiana Court of Appeals · 2002
- Liberty Insurance Corp. v. Ferguson Steel Co.Indiana Court of Appeals · 2004
- Liberty Mutual Fire Insurance Co. v. BeattyIndiana Court of Appeals · 2007
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Central Mutual Insurance Company v. Motorists Mutual Insurance CompanyIndiana Court of Appeals · 2014
- Progressive Casualty Insurance v. K.S. ex rel. George-JarrardDistrict Court, S.D. Indiana · 2010
- ANAYA-SMITH v. FEDERATED MUTUAL INSURANCE CO.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 2024
- Anaya-Smith v. Federated Mutual Insurance CompanyDistrict Court, W.D. Oklahoma · 2021
- Anaya-Smith v. Federated Mutual Insurance CompanyDistrict Court, W.D. Oklahoma · 2025
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.