Doyle v. Metropolitan Property & Casualty Insurance

719 A.2d 1163, 245 Conn. 903, 1998 Conn. LEXIS 207
Supreme Court of Connecticut·Decided May 15, 1998·No. SC 15939·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

The plaintiffs petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 48 Conn. App. 902 (AC 17006), is granted, limited to the following issue:

“Did the Appellate Court properly conclude that the tortfeasor’s vehicle is not underinsured when the tort-feasor has a $100,000 liability policy and the plaintiff has a $100,000/$300,000 split limit uninsured motorist policy in circumstances where, due to the existence of multiple claimants, the plaintiffs recovery under the tortfeasor’s policy is less than $100,000?”

[904] The Supreme Court docket number is SC 15939. Bernard, Pellegrino, in support of the petition. Karen T. Gerber, in opposition. Decided May 15, 1998

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Doyle v. Metropolitan Property & Casualty Insurance, 719 A.2d 1163, 245 Conn. 903, 1998 Conn. LEXIS 207 (Colo. 1998).

719 A.2d 1163 (Doyle v. Metropolitan Property & Casualty Insurance) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Doyle v. Metropolitan Property & Casualty Insurance
743 A.2d 156 (Supreme Court of Connecticut, 1999)