Nevers v. Aetna Insurance Co.
Court of Appeals of Washington
1Opinion of the Court
Pearson,
J.—Plaintiff Robert M. Nevers appeals from a judgment denying his claim for indemnity under his “all risks” yachtsman’s hull policy with defendant, Aetna Insurance Company.
The facts are simple. Plaintiff purchased the boat and obtained the most comprehensive insurance coverage available. Subsequently it was discovered that he had purchased a stolen boat, and he surrendered it to the true owner.
The issue on appeal is whether the insuring agreements of the policy were broad enough to encompass a loss of the boat due to a defective title. We agree with the trial court’s determination…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Ames v. BakerWashington Supreme Court · 1966
- Greene v. CheethamCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1961
- Riordan v. Commercial Travelers Mutual InsuranceCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1974
- Safeco Insurance Co. of America v. McManemyWashington Supreme Court · 1967
- Dennis v. Great American InsuranceCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1972
3Cited by12 opinions
- Fireman's Fund Insurance v. Tropical Shipping & Construction Co.Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2001
- HRG Development Corp. v. Graphic Arts Mutual InsuranceMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1988
- Leafland Group-II, Montgomery Towers Ltd. Partnership v. Insurance Co. of North AmericaNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1994
- Witcher Construction Co. v. Saint Paul Fire & Marine Insurance Co.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 1996
- Ryan v. HarrisonCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1985
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.