Gorton v. Reliance Insurance Company

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that term “uninsured automobile” previously found in uninsured motorist statute must be read to have same definition as “uninsured motor vehicle” in UCJF Law because purpose of uninsured motorist statute was to relieve burden on UCJF
• holding that term \uninsured automobile\ previously found in uninsured motorist statute must be read to have same definition as \uninsured motor vehicle\ in UCJF Law because purpose of uninsured motorist statute was to relieve burden on UCJF
• allowing injured party to recover up to minimum requirements of Financial Responsibility Law, less what tortfeasor has paid, would convert uninsured motorists coverage into a policy of excess accident coverage
• subject vehicle had liability insurance in the minimum required limits, therefore, by definition is not uninsured.
• 5 Justices + 1 judge temporarily assigned
• 5 Justices + 1 judge temporarily assigned

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).