Legal Opinion
Hertz Corp. v. Federal Insurance
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Decided July 14, 1998No. SC 15846PublishedCited by 92 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
KATZ, J.
The sole issue on appeal is whether the liability insurance coverage provided by the plaintiff automobile rental agency pursuant to a rental contract applies as primary coverage or as secondary coverage *376attaching only after the insured’s personal automobile policy issued by the defendant has been exhausted.1 We conclude that it applies as secondary coverage.
The following facts are undisputed. On June 26,1994, the defendant Joan B. Berkowitz rented an automobile from the plaintiff, the Hertz Corporation (Hertz). The rental agreement provided Berkowitz with minimum liability…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Suarez v. Dickmont Plastics Corp.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1994
- Hammer v. Lumberman's Mutual Casualty Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1990
- Miller v. United Technologies Corp.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1995
- D.H.R. Construction Co. v. DonnellySupreme Court of Connecticut · 1980
- Heyman Associates No. 1 v. Insurance Co. of PennsylvaniaSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1995
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by92 opinions
- Appleton v. Board of EducationSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2000
- Rivera v. Double A Transportation, Inc.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1999
- Witt v. St. Vincent's Medical CenterSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2000
- Miles v. FoleySupreme Court of Connecticut · 2000
- Metropolitan Life Insurance v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 2001
87 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.