Legal Opinion

Emery Ex Rel. Hietfeld v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance

Nebraska Supreme Court

Decided March 18, 1976No. 40282 and 40283PublishedCited by 14 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtClinton, J.

The question in these cases is whether the defendant insurer is liable to the plaintiffs under the uninsured motorist coverage of an automobile liability policy issued to their mother in whose automobile they were passengers when it collided with another vehicle. This question in turn must be answered by determining whether or not the other motorist (the tort-feasor) was uninsured within the meaning of section 60-509.01, R. R- S. 1943. The other motorist did, in fact, have liability coverage in the minimum amounts then required by section 60-509, R. R. S. 1943 (Reissue 1968), i.e., $10,000…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Stephens v. Allied Mutual Insurance CompanyNebraska Supreme Court · 1968
  2. Porter v. Empire Fire and Marine Insurance CompanyArizona Supreme Court · 1970
  3. Porter v. Empire Fire and Marine Insurance Co.Arizona Supreme Court · 1970
  4. Protective Fire and Casualty Company v. WotenNebraska Supreme Court · 1970
  5. Travelers Insurance v. BouzerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1974

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

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. Clark v. Regent Insurance Co.South Dakota Supreme Court · 1978
  2. Blackburn v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceIdaho Supreme Court · 1985
  3. Washington v. Georgia American Ins. Co.Mississippi Supreme Court · 1989
  4. Crossley v. Pacific Employers InsuranceNebraska Supreme Court · 1977
  5. Ziegelmayer v. Allstate InsuranceSupreme Court of Rhode Island · 1979

9 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