DiTata v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co.

How courts have described this case

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

• recognizing that a provision deducting from UM/UIM benefits any medical payments paid under the policy “is an important, legitimate limitation for the insurer * * * [that] works in conjunction with [UM] coverage to prevent double payment of medical expenses by the insurer”
• “Contracts for uninsured motorist coverage * * * must be continued in light of the public policy mandated by the Legislature. * * * The primary object remains indemnification for an insured’s loss rather than defeat of his or her claim.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).