Legal Opinion
Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co. v. Rush-Presbyterian-St. Luke's Medical Center
Appellate Court of Illinois
Decided June 26, 1992No. 1-91-2119PublishedCited by 39 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Murray
This appeal stems from a declaratory judgment action brought by Hartford Accident and Indemnity Company (Hartford) against Rush-Presbyterian-St. Luke’s Medical Center (Rush). Hartford, both the primary and excess coverage insurer, sought a determination as to its obligation to indemnify Rush in the event that Rush was held liable in a medical malpractice action filed against it. The trial court held that Hartford was relieved of its duty to indemnify Rush under both policies due to Rush’s failure to give Hartford timely notice of the malpractice suit. Rush appeals this ruling only as to the…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Greene v. RogersAppellate Court of Illinois · 1986
- The Greyhound Corporation v. Excess Insurance Company of AmericaCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1956
- Schoonover v. American Family InsuranceAppellate Court of Illinois · 1991
- Grasso v. Mid-Century InsuranceAppellate Court of Illinois · 1989
- Atlanta International Insurance v. Checker Taxi Co.Appellate Court of Illinois · 1991
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by39 opinions
- Taco Bell Corp. v. Continental Casualty Co.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2004
- Kerr v. Illinois Central RailroadAppellate Court of Illinois · 1996
- American States Insurance v. National Cycle, Inc.Appellate Court of Illinois · 1994
- Northbrook Property & Casualty Insurance v. Applied Systems, Inc.Appellate Court of Illinois · 2000
- Highlands Insurance Company v. Lewis Rail Service CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1993
34 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.