Legal Opinion

Cincinnati Insurance v. Irvin

District Court, S.D. Indiana

Decided August 19, 1998No. IP 97-0380-C H/GPublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

ENTRY ON PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

HAMILTON, District Judge.

Under most automobile liability insurance policies, a person who has permission to drive a covered vehicle is treated as an insured person who is entitled to coverage. Most such liability policies also require an insured person to cooperate with the insurance company in investigating and defending claims. In this case the driver of one car in a two-car accident was not the named insured, but she had been given permission to drive the ear. The driver therefore was insured under the policy that covered the car. This ease…

2Cases cited34 opinions

  1. Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
  2. Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
  3. Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio CorporationSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
  4. Thrasher v. United States Liability InsuranceNew York Court of Appeals · 1967
  5. Alfred MECHNIG, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. SEARS, ROEBUCK & CO., Defendant-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1989

29 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Medical Assur. Co., Inc. v. HellmanCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2010
  2. DOCTORS'COMPANY v. DrezgaUtah Supreme Court · 2009
  3. Charter Oak Fire Insurance v. Interstate Mechanical, Inc.District Court, D. Oregon · 2013
  4. MEDICAL ASSUR. CO., INC. v. MillerDistrict Court, N.D. Indiana · 2011
  5. Furst v. MayneDistrict Court, D. Arizona · 2024

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