Legal Opinion · Dissent

State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company v. Carlton

Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama

Decided May 11, 2001No. 2991014Published

1Dissent

Both the statute and the insurance policy at issue in this case contain rather straightforward, unambiguous language. Section 32-7-23, Ala. Code 1975, provides "protection of persons insured thereunder who are legallyentitled to recover damages from owners or operators of uninsured motor vehicles." (Emphasis added.) In accord with this statutory provision, the automobile insurance policy purchased by Carlton's family from State Farm provides that "[State Farm] will pay damages for bodily injury an insured is legally entitled to collect from the owner or driver of an uninsured motor vehicle."…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Allstate Ins. Co. v. BoyntonSupreme Court of Florida · 1986
  2. Higgins v. Nationwide Mutual Insurance CompanySupreme Court of Alabama · 1973
  3. State Farm Mutual Automobile Ins. Co., Inc. v. GriffinCourt of Civil Appeals of Alabama · 1973
  4. State Farm Auto. Ins. Co. v. BaldwinSupreme Court of Alabama · 1985
  5. Hogan v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1998

5 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