Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

State ex rel. Owners Insurance v. McGraw

West Virginia Supreme Court

Decided June 18, 2014No. 13-1153Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partJustice Ketchum

I agree with the majority that, on the first three claims made by Owners Insurance, the writ of prohibition should be denied. There just wasn’t enough in the record to conclude that the circuit court has exceeded its legitimate authority.

Still, I dissent because I would have granted a writ of prohibition on the fourth error, which pertains to the theory that Morían Enterprises can collect damages for attorney fees and expenses (“defense costs”) paid by its insurer, Westfield Insurance. I believe that the learned trial judge was absolutely right that those defense costs were a collateral…

2Cases cited21 opinions

  1. State Ex Rel. Hoover v. BergerWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1997
  2. Fireman's Fund Insurance v. Maryland Casualty Co.California Court of Appeal · 1998
  3. J.H. France Refractories Co. v. Allstate InsuranceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1993
  4. Sharon Steel Corp. v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co.Utah Supreme Court · 1997
  5. Marwell Construction, Inc. v. Underwriters at Lloyd's, LondonAlaska Supreme Court · 1970

16 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