Smalls v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the Court
TERRY, Associate Judge:
These cross-appeals present us with an issue of first impression: whether a “household exclusion” clause contained in an automobile insurance policy is invalid because it violates a statutory requirement that owners of automobiles in the District of Columbia carry third-party liability insurance. We are also faced with a less complex issue of whether the household exclusion clause in this particular case was subject to the doctrine of reasonable expectations. The trial court held that the household exclusion clause was invalid, but only to the extent that it conflicted…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- Davis v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1979
- Keene Corp. v. Insurance Co. of North AmericaCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1981
- Bishop v. Allstate Insurance Co.Kentucky Supreme Court · 1981
- State Farm Automobile Insurance v. AlexanderOhio Supreme Court · 1992
- Jennings v. Government Employees InsuranceCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1985
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by39 opinions
- Cameron v. USAA Property & Casualty InsuranceDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1999
- Travelers Indemnity Co. v. United Food & Commercial Workers International UnionDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2001
- Redmond v. State Farm InsuranceDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1999
- Chase v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Co.District of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2001
- Athridge v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co.Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 2003
34 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.