Legal Opinion

Jones v. Medox, Inc.

District of Columbia Court of Appeals

Decided April 1, 1980No. 79-433PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

PRYOR, Associate Judge:

Appellant contends that where two insurance companies have insured the same risk and the question of coverage arises, the insurance company with the excess “other insurance” clause should not be allowed to escape primary liability when the second insurance policy contains a pro rata “other insurance” clause. Rather, both insurance companies should shoulder a pro rata share of the liability. We agree and, therefore, reverse.

Nancy Jones, a nurse, was employed by Medox, Inc. which provides nursing personnel for hospitals and doctors in the Washington Metropolitan Area.…

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. Lamb-Weston, Inc. v. Oregon Automobile InsuranceOregon Supreme Court · 1959
  2. Werley v. United Services Automobile AssociationAlaska Supreme Court · 1972
  3. Sloviaczek v. Estate of PuckettIdaho Supreme Court · 1977
  4. Demshar v. AAACon Auto Transport, Inc.Supreme Court of Florida · 1976
  5. Travelers Insurance v. LopezNevada Supreme Court · 1977

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Jones v. Medox, Inc.District of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1981
  2. Jones v. Medox, Inc.District of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1980
  3. Jones v. Medox, Inc.District of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1981
  4. Jones v. Medox, Inc.District of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1981

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API