State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance v. Arms
Supreme Court of Delaware
1Opinion of the Court
MOORE, Justice:
This appeal by State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company (State Farm) presents us with a matter of first impression regarding the duty of an insurance company to offer additional uninsured vehicle coverage to an insured when certain changes occur in a policy. The Superior Court granted partial summary judgment to the plaintiff, Virgil D. Arms, 1 holding that under 18 Del.C. § 3902 defendant’s failure to provide plaintiff the option to increase such coverage, when certain policy changes occurred, constituted a continuing offer which could be accepted by him at any time…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Johnson v. Concord Mutual InsuranceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1973
- State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance v. JohnsonSupreme Court of Delaware · 1974
- State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance v. AbramowiczSupreme Court of Delaware · 1978
- Hartford Acc. & Indem. Co. v. SheffieldDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1979
- Goodman v. Continental Casualty CompanySuperior Court of Delaware · 1975
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by51 opinions
- Graham v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceSupreme Court of Delaware · 1989
- Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. v. KennerSupreme Court of Delaware · 1990
- Hurst v. Nationwide Mutual InsuranceSupreme Court of Delaware · 1995
- Makela v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceAppellate Court of Illinois · 1986
- Home Insurance Co. v. MaldonadoSupreme Court of Delaware · 1986
46 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.