Legal Opinion · Dissent

State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. v. Stein

Supreme Court of Colorado

Decided June 30, 1997No. 96SC283Published

1DissentChief Justice Vollack

The majority determines that the definition of “pedestrian,” as found in the no-fault portion of the insurance policies issued by State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance *391Company (State Farm) and in section 10-4-703(9), 4A C.R.S. (1994), of the No Fault Act, does not apply to the uninsured motorist (UM) coverage portion of the insurance policies at issue. The majority thus holds that “a bicyclist is not a ‘pedestrian’ within the meaning of the [UM] coverage portion of the automobile insurance policies” in this case. Maj. op. at 385. As such, the majority concludes that the anti-stacking…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Pepcol Manufacturing Co. v. Denver Union Corp.Supreme Court of Colorado · 1984
  2. Cung La v. State Farm Automobile Insurance Co.Supreme Court of Colorado · 1992
  3. Simon v. Shelter General Insurance Co.Supreme Court of Colorado · 1992
  4. Lopez v. Dairyland Insurance Co.Colorado Court of Appeals · 1994
  5. Rose v. Allstate Insurance Co.Supreme Court of Colorado · 1989

1 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