Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
5 Kentucky opinions name it 2 courts 1989–2024 2 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Kentucky courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Empire Fire & Marine Insurance Co. v. Haddixgreen2 sentences2023Co. v. Haddix, 927 S.W.2d 843, 845 (Ky. App. 1996). 2023Id. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Kentucky. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Government Employees Insurance Co. v. Globe Indemnity Co.
green
2 sentences2024Id. 11 In cases wherein one policy has a nonstandard escape clause and the other an excess clause, the policy with the excess clause bears primary liability because the nonstandard escape clause policy “anticipated the possibility of the existence of an ‘excess insurance’ clause in the driver’s insurance policy, and expressly contracted against liability in that situation.” Id. 2024Id. 11 In cases wherein one policy has a nonstandard escape clause and the other an excess clause, the policy with the excess clause bears primary liability because the nonstandard escape clause policy “anticipated the possibility of the existence of an ‘excess insurance’ clause in the driver’s insurance policy, and expressly contracted against liability in that situation.” Id. | 2 | 2023–2024 |
Jones v. Medox, Inc.
green
2 sentences1989Jones, supra, 44 Am.Jur.2d Insurance § 1791. 1989Jones, supra , 44 Am.Jur.2d Insurance § 1791. | 2 | 1989–1989 |
Kentucky Farm Bureau Mutual Insurance Co. v. Shelter Mutual Insurance Co.
green
1 sentence2016In Shelter, we noted how at odds with the mandates of the MVRA is an insurer’s practice of collecting a primary-coverage premium “while hiding behind an excess clause that purports to subvert its primary liability for that of another.” Shelter, 326 S.W.3d at 812 . | 1 | 2016–2016 |
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.