Legal Opinion

Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co. v. Wolbarst

Supreme Court of New Hampshire

Decided February 3, 1948No. 3699PublishedCited by 44 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJohnston, J.

It is unnecessary to decide in which state, Vermont or New Hampshire, the policy should be deemed to have been delivered. It contained the following provision: “Such insurance as is afforded by this policy for bodily injury liability or property damage liability shall comply with the provisions of the Motor Vehicle Financial Responsibility Law of any state or province which shall be applicable with respect to any such liability arising out of the ownership, maintenance or use of the automobile during the policy period . . . .” The effect of this provision is that the policy issued to Mr.…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Messersmith v. . American Fidelity Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1921
  2. Sheehan v. GorianskyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1947
  3. Chapin v. Ocean Accident & Guarantee Corp.Nebraska Supreme Court · 1914
  4. Wheeler v. O'ConnellMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1937
  5. Kujawa v. American Indemnity Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1944

3Cited by44 opinions

  1. Farm Bureau Mut. Automobile Ins. Co. v. HammerCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1949
  2. Nationwide Mutual Insurance Company v. RobertsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1964
  3. White v. SmithMissouri Court of Appeals · 1969
  4. Snyder v. NelsonOregon Supreme Court · 1977
  5. Dotts v. Taressa J.A.West Virginia Supreme Court · 1990

39 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