Skip to main content
· 12/24/1991

Intel Corporation v. Hartford Accident & Indemnity Company

Citations

  • 952 F.2d 1551
  • 22 Envtl. L. Rep. (Envtl. Law Inst.) 20968
  • 91 Daily Journal DAR 15971
  • 91 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 10061
  • 35 ERC (BNA) 1216
  • 1991 U.S. App. LEXIS 29817
  • 1991 WL 271366

How courts have described this case

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

  • California waiver doctrine \make[s] clear the rationale of protecting insureds and providing incentives for insurers to proceed properly.\
  • despite broadly worded summary judgment motion involving issues not fully briefed by the parties, summary judgment was not \awarded precipitously\
  • the party opposing summary 6 7 judgment must present sufficient evidence to support his claim
  • Waiver occurs when “a party intentionally relinquishes a right, or when that party’s acts are so inconsistent with an intent to enforce the right as to induce a reasonable belief that such right has been relinquished.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Lively, Fletcher, Reinhardt

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.