Maravich v. Aetna Life & Casualty Co.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that a fire insurance policy exclusion eliminating coverage for losses deriving from “neglect of the insured ... to save and preserve property” applied only to defeat coverage relative to a neglectful insured and not any or all insureds (emphasis added
• holding that a fire insurance policy exclusion eliminating coverage for losses deriving from “neglect of the insured ... to save and preserve property” applied only to defeat coverage relative to a neglectful insured and not any or all insureds (emphasis added)
• holding that a fire insurance policy exclusion eliminating coverage for losses deriving from “neglect of the insured ... to save and preserve property” applied only to defeat coverage relative to a neglectful insured and not any or all insureds (emphasis added
• holding that a fire insurance policy exclusion eliminating coverage for losses deriving from “neglect of the insured ... to save and preserve property” applied only to defeat coverage relative to a neglectful insured and not any or all insureds (emphasis added)
• holding that a fire insurance policy exclusion eliminating coverage for losses deriving from “neglect of the insured . . . to save and preserve property” applied only to defeat coverage relative to a neglectful insured and not any or all insureds (emphasis added)
• holding that a fire insurance policy exclusion eliminating coverage for losses deriving from “neglect of the insured . . . to save and preserve property” applied only to defeat coverage relative to a neglectful insured and not any or all insureds (emphasis added)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).