Pritchett v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. 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 insurer’s option to pay the vehicle’s full value or make repairs would be meaningless if the policy were read to cover diminished value
• applying contract law and finding under unambiguous “repair or replace” language of insurance policy, the insurer is not required to restore automobile’s value
• the words “repair” and “with like kind and quality” do not connote a return to market value
• the words \repair\ and \with like kind and quality\ do not connote a return to market value
• “Any precedential value of the Rhode Island Superior Court’s judgment ... is limited to its interpretation of Rhode Island law.”
• “In the common usage, the word ‘repair’ means to fix by replacing or putting together what is broken, or, as the court in Carlton v. Trinity Universal Ins. Co., [32 S.W.3d 454 (Tex.Ct.App.2000

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).