Legal Opinion

Amato v. Mercury Casualty Co.

California Court of Appeal

Decided September 29, 1993No. B063712PublishedCited by 55 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

WOODS (A. M.), P. J.

Appellant Mercury Casualty Company issued an auto policy which covered a Renault automobile. The policy stated that it did not provide liability coverage for bodily injury sustained by an insured. The policy defined insureds to include permissive users of an owned automobile and resident relatives of permissive users, including those related by marriage. Cross-appellant Anthony Charles Amato negligently caused an accident while driving the Renault with the permission of its owner. The accident injured his mother-in-law, cross-appellant Jacqueline Sutton, who was a…

2Cases cited32 opinions

  1. Gray v. Zurich Insurance Co.California Supreme Court · 1966
  2. Denham v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1970
  3. Horace Mann Ins. Co. v. Barbara B.California Supreme Court · 1993
  4. Doers v. Golden Gate Bridge, Higway & Transportation DistrictCalifornia Supreme Court · 1979
  5. CNA Casualty of California v. Seaboard Surety Co.California Court of Appeal · 1986

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

3Cited by55 opinions

  1. Ringler Associates Inc. v. Maryland Casualty Co.California Court of Appeal · 2000
  2. Pruyn v. Agricultural InsuranceCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1995
  3. Amato v. Mercury Casualty Co.California Court of Appeal · 1997
  4. People v. TaylorCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2004
  5. Davenport v. DavenportCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2011

50 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