Brien Volpe v. Prudential Property and Casualty Insurance Company

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• in applying New Hampshire law, that court stated that “[r]egular use” requires “sufficiently frequent, systematic or authoritative [use] as to [make] it reasonable for an insurer to expect an extra premium to insure an additional car”
• in applying New Hampshire law, that court stated that ‘[rjegular use’ requires ‘sufficiently frequent, systematic or authoritative [use] as to [make] it reasonable for an insurer to expect an extra premium to insure an additional car’
• “The district court, of course, has the discretion to determine whether its 3 investment of judicial energy justifies retention of jurisdiction, or if it should more properly 4 dismiss the claims without prejudice.” (internal citation omitted)
• finding “regular use” exception did not apply

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).