Olszak v. Peerless Insurance

How courts have described this case

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

• imputing to insurance company agent's knowledge of insured's coverage needs and expectations
• estoppel applied in order to prevent insurance company from applying terms of the contract to deny coverage in light of prior representations and actions
• agent’s knowledge of an insured’s needs and expectations are imputed to the insurance company so that it may be es-topped from denying coverage
• insurer estopped from denying coverage for snowplower sued by person who slipped on icy parking lot notwithstanding that policy contained “completed operations” exclusion
• “The burden of proving estoppel is upon the party asserting it, and its existence is a question of fact to be resolved by the trier of fact, who may reject or accept such portion of the testimony as it chooses.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).