Legal Opinion
Kopczynski v. Prudential Insurance
California Court of Appeal
Decided February 19, 1985No. B005500PublishedCited by 12 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
KINGSLEY, Acting P. J.
This case involves the plaintiff’s attempt to secure a third item of recovery for an injury. For the reasons set forth below, we affirm the action of the trial court in denying this latest attempt.
Plaintiff was employed on a vessel which, at the time involved, was docked at Los Angeles Harbor. While assisting in unloading some empty oil drums, he slipped and suffered a major back injury. He first applied for a recovery under the Longshoreman Harbor Workers Compensation Benefits Act (LHWC) and secured over $17,000 under that claim. He then was advised to seek…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Kopczynski v. The JacquelineCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1984
- Brezan v. Prudential Ins. Co. of AmericaDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1981
- Wilson v. Prudential Insurance Company of AmericaCourt of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · 1974
- Prudential Ins. Co. of America v. BellarDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1980
- Charles Roskell, Administrator of the Estate of Earnest R. Scherer, Deceased v. The Prudential Insurance Company of AmericaCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1976
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- State Farm Fire and Casualty Company v. Steven M. Martin Peggy D. MartinCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1989
- Carol Jan Solomon, Personal Representative of the Estate of Vincent G. Solomon v. North American Life and Casualty Insurance CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1998
- Brodkin v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Co.California Court of Appeal · 1989
- Suarez v. Life Insurance Co. of North AmericaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1988
- Benavides v. State Farm General Ins. Co.California Court of Appeal · 2006
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.