George Earl Allen v. State

How courts have described this case

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

• stating that “[b]y its own terms, [Montano’s] ‘illustration’ does not describe a mandatory requirement imposed on all insurers offering UM/UIM coverage”
• identifying no authority “[o]ther than the 17 illustration in [Montano]” for the “contention that [an insurer] must offer UM/UIM coverage on a per-vehicle basis,” and thus rejecting it
• “We conclude that [Montano] did not consider whether automobile insurers should be required to offer policyholders UM/UIM coverage on a per-vehicle basis, much less impose such a requirement.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).