Cases

ORDER MARCIA MORALES HOWARD, District Judge. This case is a breach of contract action brought by property owners Timothy and Deborah Slater (“Slaters” or “Plaintiffs”) against insurer Hartford Insurance Company of the Midwest (“Hartford”) for failure to pay under the terms of a flood insurance policy. The ease is before the Court on Plaintiffs’ Motion for Partial Summary Judgment and Memoran

In an action for a judgment declaring, inter alia, that the plaintiff Liberty Mutual Insurance Company is entitled to reimbursement by the defendant Hartford Insurance Company of the Midwest for all sums paid by it in settlement of an action to recover damages for personal injuries and wrongful death entitled D’Erasmo v Bennett, commenced in the Supreme Court, Dutchess County, under index No. 4260/01, the plaintiffs appeal (1) from so much of an

CARL E. STEWART, Chief Judge: Defendant-Appellant Hartford Insurance Company of the Midwest ("Hartford") appeals the district court's order denying its motion for summary judgment and granting that of Defendant-Appellee Axis Surplus Insurance Company ("Axis"). Hartford also challenges the district court's grant of Axis's motion to strike an affidavit submitted in support of its motion for summary judgment as untimely. For the reas

Reversed and Rendered and Majority and Dissenting Opinions filed May 14, 2024. In The Fourteenth Court of Appeals NO. 14-22-00450-CV PROGRESSIVE COUNTY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellant V. ARTEMIZ FREEMAN, Appellee On Appeal from the 113th District Court Harris County, Texas

ILLINOIS OFFICIAL REPORTS Appellate Court Allstate Property & Casualty Insurance Co. v. Mahoney, 2011 IL App (2d) 101279 Appellate Court ALLSTATE PROPERTY AND CASUALTY INSURANCE Caption COMPANY, ALLSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY, and ALLSTATE INDEMNITY COMPANY, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. RICHARD MAHONEY and TARA MAHONEY, Defendants-Appellant

Plaintiff-Appellant Hartford Underwriters Insurance Company (“Hartford”) appeals from an August 11, 2015 decision of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York granting a motion to dismiss by Defendant-Appellee Hanover Insurance Company (“Hanover”) and denying, Hartford’s cross-motion for summary judgment. The dispute turns on the interpretation of language within the insurance contracts at issue. The sole question is whether H

MEMORANDUM * Cybernet Ventures, Inc. (“Cybernet”) appeals the district court’s order granting The Hartford Insurance Co.’s (“Hartford”) Motion for Summary Judgment and denying Cybernet’s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and affirm.1 *852Cal. Civ.Cod

61 P.3d 912 (2002) 2002 OK CIV APP 126 HARTFORD INSURANCE COMPANY OF the MIDWEST, Plaintiff/Appellant/Counter-Appellee, v. Larry DYER and Dyer Glass & Mirror, Inc., a corporation, Defendants/Appellees/Counter-Appellants. No. 95,751. Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma, Division No. 1. September 12, 2002. Certiorari Denied December 10,

97 P.3d 1206 (2004) 195 Or. App. 226 Leahbelle RISTINE, a minor By and Through her guardian ad litem Barbara RISTINE, and Barbara Ristine, individually, Appellants, v. HARTFORD INSURANCE COMPANY OF THE MIDWEST, a foreign insurance company, Respondent. 0204-03158; A120828. Court of Appeals of Oregon. Argued and Submitted May 19, 2004. Dec

OPINION & ORDER RONNIE ABRAMS, District Judge: Plaintiff Hartford Underwriters Insurance Company (“Hartford”) brings this action against Defendant.Hanover Insurance Company (“Hanover”) seeking declaratory relief concerning the priority of coverage and allocation of defense and indemnity costs between Hartford and Hanover in connection with an underlying lawsuit brought against their mutual insu

USCA11 Case: 23-12518 Document: 84-1 Date Filed: 05/02/2025 Page: 1 of 19 [PUBLISH] In the United States Court of Appeals For the Eleventh Circuit ____________________ No. 23-12518 ____________________ PRIME PROPERTY AND CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY,

In the United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit ____________________ No. 16‐3280 PQ CORPORATION, Plaintiff‐Appellant, v. LEXINGTON INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant‐Appellee. _____

*802 OPINION LAY, Circuit Judge. On October 31, 2000, Hartford Insurance Company filed a federal declaratory judgment action seeking a declaration that Catt Michele Huth is not entitled to under-insured motorist benefits under her mother’s policy because she was not a resident of h

12 April 2000 No. 2--99--0325 _________________________________________________________________ IN THE APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS SECOND DISTRICT _________________________________________________________________ SHARO

728 N.E.2d 81 (2000) 312 Ill. App.3d 811 245 Ill.Dec. 350 Sharon NILA and Deborah Kuykendall, as Co-ex'rs of the Estate of Patricia Scarff, Deceased, and Jennifer Myra, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. HARTFORD INSURANCE COMPANY OF the MIDWEST, Defendant-Appellant. No. 2-99-0325. Appellate Court of Illinois, Second District. April 12, 200

| LAUNDERS, Judge. The Plaintiff Betty Klooster was injured in an automobile accident. Mrs. Klooster and her husband instituted an action against the tortfeasor and his liability insurer, Hartford Automobile Insurance Company of the Midwest (hereinafter “Hartford”), and their uninsured/under insured motorist insurer, State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. (hereinafter “State Farm”). The Plaintiffs subsequently settled wi

BENTON, Circuit Judge. C.S. McCrossan Inc. sued Federal Insurance Company for coverage under a crime insurance policy. Both moved for summary judgment. The district court 1 granted the Company's motion. C.S. McCrossan Inc. v. Federal Ins. Co. ,

POSNER, Circuit Judge. This diversity lawsuit between two insurance companies is the sequel to a misfortune that occurred more than a decade ago. In 1975 Mrs. Tannebaum became a quadriplegic after an operation at Northwest Hospital in Chicago to straighten her nose. She and her husband brought a malpractice action in an Illinois state court against the surgeon, Dr. Broder; the a

325 F.Supp.2d 1057 (2004) CRAB BOAT OWNERS ASSOCIATION, Robert N. Miller, Larry Collins, and John T. Tarantino Plaintiffs, v. HARTFORD INSURANCE COMPANY OF THE MIDWEST, the Hartford, Hartford Financial Services Group Inc., and Does 1 through 50 inclusive, Defendants. No. C 03-05417 MHP. United States District Court, N.D. California. July 20, 2004.

TINDER, Circuit Judge. When Heike Wehrle and Robert Wehrle were severely injured in an auto accident with a drunk-driver carrying minimal insurance, they contacted their own insurance company, Cincinnati Insurance Company (Cincinnati), invoking the underinsured-motorist provision of their policy. Cincinnati paid them the difference between their $1 million coverage limit (their