Earle v. Cobb
Kentucky Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion of the Court by
Chief Justice LAMBERT.
The issue presented is whether an underinsured motorist (UIM) carrier must be identified at trial when it chooses to preserve its subrogation rights by means of the procedure set forth in Coots v. Allstate Ins. Co.1 (the “Coots procedure”). We conclude that the UIM carrier should be so identified as a party because it was named as a party by virtue of its contract and because it chose to retain its subrogation rights by substitution of its payment for that of the liability insurance carrier. As the trial court and the Court of Appeals held…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Coots v. Allstate Insurance Co.Kentucky Supreme Court · 1993
- True v. RainesKentucky Supreme Court · 2003
- Farley v. Allstate InsuranceCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1999
- Allstate Insurance v. MillerCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1989
- Lima v. ChambersUtah Supreme Court · 1982
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by24 opinions
- Harris v. JacksonKentucky Supreme Court · 2006
- S.J.L.S. v. T.L.S.Court of Appeals of Kentucky · 2008
- State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. v. RiggsKentucky Supreme Court · 2016
- Combs v. StortzCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 2009
- Smith v. SummersCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 2018
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.