Hertz Corp. v. Amica Mutual Insurance
This text of 717 A.2d 235 (Hertz Corp. v. Amica Mutual Insurance) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Connecticut primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
The plaintiffs petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 48 Conn. App. 918 (AC 17247), is granted, limited to the following issue:
“In a declaratory judgment action where the plaintiff sought declaratory relief with respect to whether it or the defendant insurer was responsible for providing primary insurance coverage in a pending underlying tort case, did the Appellate Court properly affirm the judgment of the trial court dismissing the declaratory judgment action for lack of subject matter jurisdiction on the grounds such action was premature?”
NORCOTT, J., did not participate in the consideration or decision of this petition.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
717 A.2d 235, 245 Conn. 920, 1998 Conn. LEXIS 281, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hertz-corp-v-amica-mutual-insurance-conn-1998.