Legal Opinion

Hull v. Aetna Insurance

Nebraska Supreme Court

Decided March 31, 1995No. S-93-887PublishedCited by 32 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtFahrnbruch, J.

Darrell D. Hull, a self-employed dentist, seeks workers’ compensation for an occupational illness which could be traced through the coverage periods of two successive insurers.

Both insurance carriers, Continental Western Insurance Company (Continental) and Aetna Insurance Company (Aetna), contend they are not liable. Both insurance carriers base their defenses on the last injurious exposure rule.

The Nebraska Court of Appeals dismissed this appeal on the ground that the Workers’ Compensation Court three-judge review panel’s remand to the trial judge did not constitute a final, appealable…

2Cases cited20 opinions

  1. Matter of Compensation of BrackeOregon Supreme Court · 1982
  2. Mendoza v. Omaha Meat ProcessorsNebraska Supreme Court · 1987
  3. Department of Labor & Industries v. FankhauserWashington Supreme Court · 1993
  4. Jarrett v. EichlerNebraska Supreme Court · 1993
  5. Osteen v. A. C. & S., Inc.Nebraska Supreme Court · 1981

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

3Cited by32 opinions

  1. Sanitary & Improvement District No. 1 v. Nebraska Public Power DistrictNebraska Supreme Court · 1998
  2. Enger v. FMCSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1997
  3. Kerkman v. Weidner Williams Roofing Co.Nebraska Supreme Court · 1996
  4. Berggren v. Grand Island Accessories, Inc.Nebraska Supreme Court · 1996
  5. Wilson v. LARKINS & SONS & SONSNebraska Supreme Court · 1996

27 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