Legal Opinion

Rummel v. St. Paul Surplus Lines Insurance

New Mexico Supreme Court

Decided August 8, 1997No. 23606PublishedCited by 26 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

BACA, Justice.

1. Appellant Kenneth Rummel appeals from a district court order granting two motions for partial summary judgment in favor of Appellees, Harbor Insurance Company (Harbor) and St. Paul Surplus Lines Insuranee Company (St. Paul). 1 The district court found that, as a matter of law, neither insurance company was exposed to liability for a judgment entered against their insured, Circle K. On appeal we address whether the district court erred in concluding as a matter of law that neither the Harbor, nor the St. Paul, insurance policies provided coverage for the judgment. We…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Mark V, Inc. v. MellekasNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1993
  2. Pharmaseal Laboratories, Inc. v. GoffeNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1977
  3. C.R. Anthony Co. v. Loretto Mall PartnersNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1991
  4. Rummel v. Lexington InsuranceNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1997
  5. Crown Center Redevelopment Corp. v. Occidental Fire & Casualty Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1986

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by26 opinions

  1. Ontiveros Insulation Co., Inc. v. SanchezNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 2000
  2. Celaya v. HallNew Mexico Supreme Court · 2004
  3. Wilson v. DenverNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1998
  4. Fernandez v. Walgreen Hastings Co.New Mexico Supreme Court · 1998
  5. Kitchell v. Public Service Co.New Mexico Supreme Court · 1998

21 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