Maryland Automobile Insurance Fund v. Baxter
Court of Special Appeals of Maryland
1Opinion of the Court
SALMON, Judge.
The main question presented in this appeal is whether Maryland law requires an automobile insurer to provide uninsured motorist coverage to an uninsured stranger/pedestrian who is struck by an automobile driven by a person excluded under the insurer’s policy. We shall answer that question in the negative, as did the Circuit Court for Baltimore City.
I
On January 21, 2007, Teresa Ann Palugi owned a 1998 Jeep Grand Cherokee that she insured with Interstate Automobile Insurance Company (“Interstate”). ' When Mrs. Palugi applied for insurance, Interstate discovered that William…
2Cases cited37 opinions
- Utica Mutual Insurance v. ContriscianeSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1984
- Nickerson v. Citizens Mutual InsuranceMichigan Supreme Court · 1975
- Rau v. Liberty Mutual InsuranceCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1978
- Jennings v. Government Employees InsuranceCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1985
- Reese v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1979
32 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Blackstone International Ltd. v. Maryland Casualty Co.Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · 2014
- Dionas v. StateCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland · 2011
- Beahm v. Erie Insurance Exch.Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · 2024
- Beahm v. Erie Insurance Exch.Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · 2024
- Dove v. AMCO Insurance CompanyDistrict Court, D. Maryland · 2020
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.