Legal Opinion

California Casualtly Indemnity Exchange v. Pettis

California Court of Appeal

Decided August 11, 1987No. C000188PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

SPARKS, J.

The question in this case is whether uninsured motorist benefits may be combined or “stacked” to satisfy the total damages alleged to have been incurred by the insureds. We are called upon to resolve a conflict of laws question and to construe out-of-state insurance clauses of California automobile liability policies for an accident in Hawaii. We conclude that California law governs and that the insureds are not entitled under their policies to stack the uninsured motorists coverage.

Plaintiff California Casualty Indemnity Exchange (California Casualty) is a California…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Allstate Insurance v. HagueSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
  2. Johansen v. California State Automobile Ass'n Inter-Insurance BureauCalifornia Supreme Court · 1975
  3. Walton v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceHawaii Supreme Court · 1974
  4. Andrew L. Cunninghame v. The Equitable Life Assurance Society of the United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1981
  5. Allstate Insurance v. MorganHawaii Supreme Court · 1978

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

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. FMC Corp. v. Plaisted & CompaniesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1998
  2. Bohannan v. Allstate Insurance Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1991
  3. Sierra-Bay Federal Land Bank Ass'n v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1991
  4. Stonewall Surplus Lines Insurance v. Johnson Controls, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1993
  5. Ford Motor Co. v. Insurance Co. of North AmericaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1995

6 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