Legal Opinion
HARTFORD INS. v. Merchants & Farmers Bank
Supreme Court of Alabama
Decided September 2, 2005No. 1031883PublishedCited by 58 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
This action arises out of a dispute between Hartford Casualty Insurance Company ("Hartford") and its insured, Merchants Farmers Bank ("Merchants"). Merchants filed an action against Hartford seeking a judgment declaring that Hartford was obligated to defend and indemnify Merchants in an action between Merchants and one of its customers, Bridges Warehouse Furniture, Inc. ("Bridges"), a retail seller of furniture. The trial court determined that Hartford was obligated to defend and to indemnify Merchants in that underlying action. Hartford appealed. We reverse and remand.
Facts
As a result of a…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- Goldberg v. Lumber Mutual Casualty InsuranceNew York Court of Appeals · 1948
- Ex Parte Board of Zoning AdjustmentSupreme Court of Alabama · 1994
- Acceptance Ins. Co. v. BrownSupreme Court of Alabama · 2001
- US Fidelity & Guar. Co. v. ArmstrongSupreme Court of Alabama · 1985
- Ladner Co., Inc. v. Southern Guaranty Ins.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1977
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by58 opinions
- James River Insurance Company v. Ultratec Special Effects IncCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2022
- Pennsylvania National Mutual Casualty Insurance Company v. St. Catherine of Sienna ParishCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2015
- James Snell v. United Specialty Insurance CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2024
- Essex Insurance v. FoleyDistrict Court, S.D. Alabama · 2011
- Mid-Continent Casualty Co. v. Advantage Medical Electronics, LLCSupreme Court of Alabama · 2015
53 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.