Murphy v. Kuhn

How courts have described this case

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

• recognizing that insurance agent has well-established common-law duty to provide, or attempt to provide, requested level of coverage
• holding that an insurance broker did not have a fiduciary duty to his customer even though the insured had been his customer for seventeen years and had provided several insurance services to the plaintiff
• recognizing in dicta that an insurance agent may incur additional responsibilities where he “receives compensation for consultation apart from payment of the premiums”
• recognizing in dicta that an insurance agent may incur additional responsibilities where he “receives compensation for consultation apart from payment of the premiums”
• finding no such duty was owed by an insurance agent to an insured, given specific facts of the relationship
• noting “jurisdictions have recognized such an additional duty of advisement in exceptional situations where, for example, (1) the agent receives compensation for consultation apart from payment of the premiums; (2

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).