Legal Opinion

Howell v. Harleysville Mutual Insurance

Court of Appeals of Maryland

Decided February 28, 1986No. Misc. No. 25, September Term, 1985PublishedCited by 27 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

SMITH, Judge.

We shall hold in this case that there cannot be intra-policy “stacking” or pyramiding of uninsured motorists benefits. The case arises on certification of a question of law from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland pursuant to Maryland Code (1974) § 12-601, Courts and Judicial Proceedings Article. The question certified is:

“Whether the Harleysville insurance policy issued to Pritchett and Maryland law permit the stacking or aggre gating of uninsured motorists coverage under the facts of this case?”

The facts are gleaned from the stipulation entered into by…

2Cases cited20 opinions

  1. Utica Mutual Insurance v. ContriscianeSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1984
  2. Cunningham v. Insurance Company of North AmericaSupreme Court of Virginia · 1972
  3. Ohio Casualty Insurance Co. v. StanfieldKentucky Supreme Court · 1979
  4. Lambert v. Liberty Mutual Insurance CompanySupreme Court of Alabama · 1976
  5. Aragona v. St. Paul Fire & Marine InsuranceCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1977

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

3Cited by27 opinions

  1. Chmielewski v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1991
  2. Lloyd E. Mitchell, Inc. v. Maryland Casualty Co.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1991
  3. Geico v. Valentine FetisoffCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1992
  4. Kendall v. Nationwide InsuranceCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1997
  5. Harris v. MageeMississippi Supreme Court · 1990

22 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