Legal Opinion
Middlesex Insurance v. Rady
Connecticut Appellate Court
Decided June 3, 1994No. 11941PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtSchaller, J.
The sole issue reserved for our advice in this case is whether public policy precludes an automobile insurer from excluding from uninsured motor *680ist coverage a resident family member who owns a vehicle. Following an arbitration award favoring the defendant, the plaintiff insurance company filed an application in Superior Court to vacate the award. By agreement, the parties reserved the question for the advice of this court pursuant to Practice Book § 4146 et seq. We answer the reserved question in the negative.
The parties stipulated to the relevant facts. On May 19, 1986, Audrey Rady was…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Hayes v. SmithSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1984
- Covenant Insurance v. CoonSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1991
- Pecker v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1976
- Battersby v. BattersbySupreme Court of Connecticut · 1991
- Middlesex Insurance v. QuinnSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1993
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Giulietti v. GiuliettiConnecticut Appellate Court · 2001
- Middlesex Insurance v. RadySupreme Court of Connecticut · 1994
- Miller v. Nationwide Insurance Company, No. Cv99-0431545s (Jun. 29, 2000)Connecticut Superior Court · 2000