Legal Opinion

Nationwide Mutual Insurance v. Starr

Supreme Court of Delaware

Decided May 2, 1990PublishedCited by 21 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MOORE, Justice.

Once again we are required to resolve a dispute over the terms of an automobile insurance policy. Nationwide Mutual Insurance Company (Nationwide) argues that Lamont and Betty Starr (the Starrs) are not entitled to uninsured motorist benefits because they agreed to release the tort-feasor, Barbara Suiter (Suiter), in exchange for the right to pursue a bad faith settlement claim against Suiter’s insurer. The Court of Chancery ruled that the agreement only conditionally released Suiter; thus, Nationwide’s right of subrogation was preserved and it suffered no prejudice from the…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Fiduciary Trust Co. v. Fiduciary Trust Co.Supreme Court of Delaware · 1982
  2. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance v. JohnsonSupreme Court of Delaware · 1974
  3. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance v. ArmsSupreme Court of Delaware · 1984
  4. Rohner v. NiemannSupreme Court of Delaware · 1977
  5. Collins v. BurkeSupreme Court of Delaware · 1980

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

3Cited by21 opinions

  1. PAJ, Inc. v. Hanover Insurance Co.Texas Supreme Court · 2008
  2. Gaffin v. Teledyne, Inc.Supreme Court of Delaware · 1992
  3. Prince George's County v. Local Government Insurance TrustCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2005
  4. United States Cellular Investment Co. of Allentown v. Bell Atlantic Mobile Systems, Inc.Supreme Court of Delaware · 1996
  5. Oglesby v. Penn Mutual Life InsuranceDistrict Court, D. Delaware · 1995

16 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