Legal Opinion
Nathanson v. Hertz Corp.
California Court of Appeal
Decided July 3, 1986No. B016592PublishedCited by 11 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
HASTINGS, J.
The sole issue in this appeal is whether The Hertz Corporation, a self-insurer, can be held to the same standards of an insurance company as required by Insurance Code sections 790.01 and 790.03, subdivision (h), infra.
The Hertz Corporation (Hertz), defendant and respondent, was granted a summary judgment in an action filed by Gayle Nathanson, plaintiff and appellant (appellant). Appellant was injured in an automobile accident with a vehicle owned by Hertz and rented to one David Cuyler (Cuyler). Appellant’s vehicle was rear-ended by Cuyler on a freeway causing injury to…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Royal Globe Insurance v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1979
- General Insurance v. Mammoth Vista Owners' Ass'nCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1985
- Richardson v. GAB Business Services, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1984
- People v. United National Life InsuranceCalifornia Supreme Court · 1967
- Davis v. Continental InsuranceCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1986
3Cited by11 opinions
- Clemens v. American Warranty Corp.California Court of Appeal · 1987
- Truck Insurance Exchange v. Amoco Corp.California Court of Appeal · 1995
- Grand Rent a Car Corp. v. 20th Century InsuranceCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1994
- Thompson v. CannonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1990
- Chambi v. Regents of University of CaliforniaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2002
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.