We found a match
Your institution may have access to this item. Find your institution then sign in to continue.
- Title
HIT-AND-RUN -- PHYSICAL CONTACT -- INSURED'S WINDSHIELD STRUCK BY ICE -- WITHIN EISENBERG AND GAVIN GUIDELINES.
- Abstract
This article presents information on a court decision in the case, Smith v. Great American Insurance Co. in the U.S. Injury suffered to insured as a result of accident in which ice and snow, dislodged from an unknown truck in front of insured's automobile, struck insured's windshield causing glass to break, was held to be within "hit-and-run" provision of uninsured motorist endorsement which defined a hit-and-run vehicle as one which causes bodily injury arising of physical contact of suck vehicle with the insured. In refusing to stay arbitration on the insurer's contention that no hit-and-run vehicle was involved, the court held that the facts in the case came within the guidelines and principles set forth in MVAIC v. Eisenberg, and Gavin v. MVAIC. The Court of Appeals held that the "physical contact" requirement was fulfilled notwithstanding the intervention of a third car between the hit-and-run vehicle and the insured's automobile since the uninsured motorist statute does not require direct physical contact.
- Subjects
UNITED States; LEGAL judgments; ACTIONS &; defenses (Law); HIT &; run accidents; UNINSURED motorist insurance; GREAT American Insurance Co.; AUTOMOBILE drivers; GOVERNMENT policy
- Publication
Arbitration Journal, 1970, Vol 25, Issue 3, p210
- ISSN
0003-7893
- Publication type
Article