Legal Opinion

Employers Liability Assurance Corp. v. Roux

Supreme Court of New Hampshire

Decided October 30, 1953No. 4231PublishedCited by 9 opinions

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

  1. Wasilko v. Home Mutual Casualty Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1967
  2. Inland Mutual Insurance Company v. StallingsCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1959
  3. George W. Booth v. American Casualty Company of Reading, Pennsylvania, a CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1958
  4. Kyle v. McCARRONSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1963
  5. Auclair v. Allstate InsuranceSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1978

4 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