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.
9 Indiana opinions name it 2 courts 1992–2016 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Indiana 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 |
|---|---|---|
Liberty Mutual Insurance Co. v. Metzlergreen2 sentences2016“The doctrine of collateral estoppel applies to insurance contracts and an insurer is ordinarily bound by the result of litigation to which its insured is a party, so long as the insurer had notice and opportunity to control the proceedings.” Id. 2002“The doctrine of collateral estoppel applies to insurance contracts and an insurer is ordinarily bound by the result of litigation to which its insured is a party, so long as the insurer had notice and opportunity to control the proceedings.” Id. (citations omitted). | 1 | 4 |
State Farm Fire & Casualty Co. v. T.B. Ex Rel. Brucegreen2 sentences2009Bruce, 762 N.E.2d 1227, 1231-82 (Ind.2002) ("The doctrine of collateral estoppel applies to insurance contracts and an insurer is ordinarily bound by the result of litigation to which its insured is a party, so long as the insurer had notice and opportunity to control the proceedings.... 2004As explained by our Supreme Court in Bruce, supra: "Collateral estoppel, also referred to as 'issue preclusion, describes the binding effect of a previous judgment regarding a particular issue on the parties and their privies in a subsequent action. 'The doctrine of collateral estoppel applies to insurance contracts and an insurer is ordinarily bound by the result of litigation to which its insured is a party, so long as the insurer had notice and opportunity to control the proceedings. | 1 | 2 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Indiana. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Hoosier Casualty Company v. Miers
green
2 sentences1993Hoosier Casualty Co. v. Miers (1940), 217 Ind. 400 , 27 N.E.2d 342, 344 ; Id. 1993Hoosier Casualty Co. v. Miers (1940), 217 Ind. 400 , 27 N.E.2d 342, 344 ; Id. | 2 | 1992–1993 |
Midwestern Indemnity Co. v. Laikin
green
2 sentences2013“The doctrine of collateral estoppel applies to insurance contracts and an insurer is ordinarily bound by the result of litigation to which its insured is a party, so long as the insurer had notice and the opportunity to control the proceedings.” Id. at 836 (quoting Liberty Mut. 2013"The doctrine of collateral estoppel applies to insurance contracts and an insurer is ordinarily bound by the result of litigation to which its insured is a party, so long as the insurer had notice and the opportunity to control the proceedings." Id. at 836 (quoting Liberty Mut. | 1 | 2013–2013 |
Snodgrass v. Baize
green
1 sentence1992Hoosier Casualty Co. v. Miers (1940), 217 Ind. 400 , 27 N.E.2d 842 , Snodgrass v. Baize (1980), Ind.App., 405 N.E.2d 48 , reh. denied. | 1 | 1992–1992 |