Legal Opinion

Russak v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided July 24, 1973No. 72-1279PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

PEARSON, Judge.

The appellant, Paul Russak, was insured by the appellee, State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company, under an automobile liability policy which included collision coverage. Janice Russak, the appellant’s wife, was involved in an automobile collision with one Alan Telisman while she was operating an automobile owned by her husband. As a result of the collision, the appellant’s automobile was damaged and Janice Russak sustained personal injuries. Thereafter, appellant made a claim under the coilision coverage with State Farm for the damage to his automobile. The claim in the…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Hayward v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1942
  2. Clark v. American Casualty Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1957
  3. Titus v. Emmco Insurance CompanyDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1959

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Ortega v. Motors Ins. Corp.District Court of Appeal of Florida · 1989
  2. Russak v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceSupreme Court of Florida · 1973
  3. Seneca Specialty Insurance Company v. Jade Beach Condominium Association, Inc., etc.District Court of Appeal of Florida · 2024

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

Powered by the Exa API