Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 2 of 2
Full-Text Articles in Insurance Law
Negligence - The "Same Hazard" Principle - Nonliability In Event Of Injury From A Hazard Of Different Type From That Which Justified Imposition Of Duty To Use Due Care, Michigan Law Review
Negligence - The "Same Hazard" Principle - Nonliability In Event Of Injury From A Hazard Of Different Type From That Which Justified Imposition Of Duty To Use Due Care, Michigan Law Review
Michigan Law Review
In a previous suit by plaintiff against a policy holder, defendant, who was the insurer and conducted the defense for the insured, rejected an offer made by plaintiff to settle the claim for less than the policy limit, which was $5,000. There was thereafter a verdict for plaintiff for $7,500, which was satisfied to the amount of $5,000. Plaintiff then brought an action against the defendant insurance company in the name of the policy holder to recover the remainder of the judgment on the ground that defendant was negligent in rejecting the plaintiff's settlement offer. Held, plaintiff stated no …
Insurance - Defenses Of Liability Insurer Against Third Party Injured By Assured Under Statute Giving Injured Party Right Of Action Against Insurer - Constitutionality, Michigan Law Review
Insurance - Defenses Of Liability Insurer Against Third Party Injured By Assured Under Statute Giving Injured Party Right Of Action Against Insurer - Constitutionality, Michigan Law Review
Michigan Law Review
Plaintiff, having recovered a judgment against insured defendant for injuries sustained in an automobile accident, filed a supplemental bill against defendant's insurer to recover the 'insurance money. The statute granting plaintiff this right provides that whenever damage occurs for which the insured is responsible, the liability of the insurer "shall become absolute," and upon his obtaining a judgment against the assured, the injured person shall be entitled to have the insurance money applied to satisfy the judgment. The insurer defended on the ground that the insured violated a condition of the policy by failing to cooperate in the defense of …