Legal Opinion

Corley v. Hertz Corp.

Court of Appeals of Washington

Decided November 21, 1994No. 32915-4-IPublishedCited by 16 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtGrosse, J.

Hertz Corporation and H.A.S. Corporation appeal the summary judgment in favor of Melvin and Lucy Corley (hereafter Corley). The judgment declared that, as a matter of law, Hertz and H.A.S. must provide underinsured motorist (UIM) coverage with policy limits of $500,000 to Corley under the agreement by which Melvin Corley rented the automobile he was driving when he was involved in a collision. We affirm, holding that the trial court did not err in concluding that: (1) venue was proper in Washington, not Colorado; (2) Washington law rather than Colorado law applied; (3) Corley did not reject…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Olympic Steamship Co., Inc. v. Centennial Ins. Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1991
  2. Clements v. Travelers Indemnity Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1993
  3. O'Brien v. Shearson Hayden Stone, Inc.Washington Supreme Court · 1978
  4. Johnson v. Farmers Insurance Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1991
  5. Van Vonno v. Hertz CorporationWashington Supreme Court · 1992

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

3Cited by16 opinions

  1. Torgerson v. STATE FARM MUT. AUTO. INS.Court of Appeals of Washington · 1998
  2. Torgerson v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1998
  3. Cochran v. Great West Casualty Co.Court of Appeals of Washington · 2003
  4. Cann v. King CountyCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1997
  5. Humleker v. Gallagher Bassett Services, Inc.Court of Appeals of Washington · 2011

11 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