Legal Opinion

Mid-Continent Casualty Co. v. Theus

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Decided April 9, 1979No. 52940PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

IRWIN, Vice Chief Justice.

The issue presented is whether an insured may maintain an action against her insurance carrier when her uninsured motorist coverage is equal to the alleged tortfeasor’s liability coverage. Juliene Dorsey, insured, commenced an action against Harvey Myers, the alleged tortfeasor, and Mid-Continent Casualty Company, her own insurance carrier. Petition alleged that insured received injuries in an automobile accident caused by the tortfeasor, who had the statutorily required liability coverage of $5,000.00 per person and $10,000.00 per accident. Petition stated that…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Seventeen Hundred Peoria, Inc. v. City of TulsaSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1966
  2. General Motors Corp., Argonaut Division v. CookSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1974
  3. Simmons v. Hartford Accident & Indemnity CompanySupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1975
  4. Firestone Tire & Rubber Company v. BarnettSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1970

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Uptegraft v. Home Insurance Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1983
  2. Porter v. MFA Mutual Insurance Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1982
  3. Heavner v. Farmers Insurance Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1983
  4. Cofer v. MortonSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1989
  5. McKinley v. Prudential Property & Casualty Insurance Co.Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · 1980

7 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