Employers Liability Assurance Corp. v. Roux
Supreme Court of New Hampshire
1Opinion of the CourtLampron, J.
The issue to be decided is essentially whether the Financial Responsibility Act (R. L., c. 122, as amended) extends the coverage of a “Named Operator Policy” to include a vehicle owned by the policyholder contrary to an express exclusion in the terms of the policy.
To comply with the Act (s. 1 VII) a policy of liability insurance must provide: “(a) indemnity for or protection to the insured and any person responsible to him for the operation of the insured’s motor vehicle . . . against loss by reason of the liability to pay damages to others . . . accidentally sustained . . . arising out of…
2Cited by9 opinions
- Wasilko v. Home Mutual Casualty Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1967
- Inland Mutual Insurance Company v. StallingsCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1959
- George W. Booth v. American Casualty Company of Reading, Pennsylvania, a CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1958
- Kyle v. McCARRONSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1963
- Auclair v. Allstate InsuranceSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1978
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.