Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite American Home Assurance Company v. Czarniecki, 230 So. 2d 253.

172 citing documents.

Gremillion v. Goleman 316 So. 2d 810 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1975
Notwithstanding the clear import of its decision in Rogillio v. Cazedessus , relative to strict application of the term "named insured" , (1969) the court extended the authority of the "named insured" to a minor son who was for all intents and purposes the owner of the automobile with unrestricted use privileges, even though it was registered and insured in his fathers name.
Employers Commercial Union Ins. Co. v. Bertrand 306 So. 2d 426 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1975
Nemeroff v. Dolphin Swimming Pool Co., Inc. 306 So. 2d 94 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1974
[3] , ; Benoit v. Fuselier, La.App., ; Smith v. Insurance Company of Pennsylvania, La.App., .
Swanson v. Comeaux 296 So. 2d 267 La. 1974
Hurston v. Dufour 292 So. 2d 733 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1974
Reichert v. Continental Insurance Company 290 So. 2d 730 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1974
Mut v. Newark Insurance Company 289 So. 2d 237 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1974
Spiers v. Lane, La.App., .
Carter v. New Orleans Public Service, Inc. 293 So. 2d 527 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1974
Swanson v. Comeaux 286 So. 2d 117 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1974
Audubon Insurance Co. v. Guidry 289 So. 2d 311 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1973
Spiers v. Lane 278 So. 2d 549 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1973
Oceanonics, Inc. v. Petroleum Distributing Company 280 So. 2d 874 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1973
Johnson v. Aetna Casualty and Surety Co. 274 So. 2d 769 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1973
(Emphasis added.)'" American Home *773 , (1969).
Lee v. Allstate Insurance Company 274 So. 2d 433 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1973
The Supreme Court, , (1969), covers a situation where the minor child of the named insured had broad, free and unrestricted use of the insured vehicle.
Bagnell v. Travelers Insurance Co. 270 So. 2d 255 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1972
4th Cir., 1966) [sic] Longroul v. Massachuetts Bonding & Insurance Co., [sic] Hoeden [sic], American Home Assurance Company v. Czarnele [Czarniecki] [sic] , (1969) Cert.
Austrum v. City of Baton Rouge 267 So. 2d 284 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1972
2d Cir. 1968), writs granted but issue in point here undisturbed, , (1969); and Moore v. Traders & General Ins.
Associated Indem. Corp. v. LOUISIANA INDUS. PRE. CORP. 259 So. 2d 89 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1972
(1969) the Supreme Court stated: "Generally the insurer's obligation to defend suits against its insured is broader than its liability for damage claims.
Central National Insurance Co. of Omaha v. Bardsley 256 So. 2d 734 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1971
2d Cir. 1968), writs granted but issue of contributory negli *737 gence undisturbed , (1969); and Moore v. Traders & General Ins.
Devall v. State Farm Mutual Insurance Company 249 So. 2d 282 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1971
(1969), for the proposition that under the facts of the case Kenneth Joiner legally occupies the position of named insured clothed with all of the authority and rights which the actual denominated named insured of defendant possessed, and with the further result that Kenneth Joiner, by expressly permit
Williams v. Buckelew 246 So. 2d 58 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1971
The trial court based its opinion, in casting Travelers, , (1970).
Lumbermens Mut. Cas. Co. v. Connecticut Fire Ins. Co. 239 So. 2d 472 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1970
Under usual policy terms, it seems clear that an excess insurer does not owe its insured a defense of a claim within a primary insurer's limits; , (1969).
Guillory v. Czarniecki 230 So. 2d 261 La. 1969
This case was consolidated with American Home Assurance Company, et al. v. M. J. Czarniecki, et al., , .

Explore

Outcomes

Cited by