Legal Opinion

Espinet v. Horvath

Supreme Court of Vermont

Decided August 9, 1991No. 89-632PublishedCited by 27 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJohnson, J.

Defendant challenges a trial court summary judgment ruling that State Farm Insurance Company (State Farm) has no contractual obligation to defend or indemnify him in connection with injuries sustained by plaintiff whom defendant shot in the head. On appeal, defendant contends first that summary judgment was inappropriate because a genuine issue of material fact exists as to whether he intended or expected to injure plaintiff, and second that the injury was covered by his State Farm policy because he acted in self-defense. We reverse and remand with respect to the first issue, but affirm with…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio CorporationSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
  2. Price v. LelandSupreme Court of Vermont · 1988
  3. Kelly v. Town of BarnardSupreme Court of Vermont · 1990
  4. State v. Glens Falls InsuranceSupreme Court of Vermont · 1979
  5. Lockhart v. Allstate InsuranceCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1978

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

3Cited by27 opinions

  1. City of Burlington v. National Union Fire InsuranceSupreme Court of Vermont · 1994
  2. Northern Security Insurance v. PerronSupreme Court of Vermont · 2001
  3. Garneau v. Curtis & Bedell, Inc.Supreme Court of Vermont · 1992
  4. State v. CNA Ins. CompaniesSupreme Court of Vermont · 2001
  5. Cooperative Fire Ins. Ass'n v. BizonSupreme Court of Vermont · 1997

22 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