Legal Opinion

Mun Quon Kok v. Pacific Insurance Co.

Hawaii Supreme Court

Decided December 11, 1969No. 4855PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Per curiam

The only question on this appeal is whether Mun Quon Kok, appellant, is an insured within the uninsured motorists provisions of the policy issued to his son. The uninsured motorists portion of the policy, part IV, provides:

“Definitions.

The definitions under Part I, except the definition of ‘insured,’ apply to Part IV, and under Part IV : ‘insured’ means:(a) the named insured and any relative.”

Part I provides:

“Definitions.

‘relative’ means a relative of the named insured Who is a resident of the same household.”

We hold that part IV of the policy unambiguously and clearly states that insured…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Mazzilli v. Acc. & Cas. Ins. Co. of WinterthurSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1961
  2. Appleton v. Merchants Mutual InsuranceAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1962
  3. Smitke v. Travelers Indemnity Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1962
  4. Fay v. John Waldron Corp.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1936

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Vaiarella v. Hanover InsuranceMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1991
  2. Griffith v. Security InsuranceSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1975
  3. Mikelson v. United Services Automobile Ass'nHawaii Supreme Court · 2005
  4. Tirona v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceDistrict Court, D. Hawaii · 1993
  5. Park v. Government Employees Insurance Co.Hawaii Supreme Court · 1999

2 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