Romero v. Dairyland Insurance

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the uninsured motorist statute is to be liberally interpreted “in order to implement its remedial purpose”
• holding that “[b]ecause we liberally interpret the statute in order to implement its remedial purpose, language in the statute that provides for an exception to [UM] coverage should be construed strictly to protect the insured” (citation omitted)
• explaining that any rejection must be “knowingly and intelligently made” and requiring the insurer to give the insured “affirmative evidence of the extent of coverage”
• noting that statutory language that would create an “exception to uninsured coverage should be construed strictly to protect the insured”
• stating that public policy embodies making uninsured motorist overage part of automobile liability insurance policies and that an insured may reject such coverage
• providing that uninsured motorist coverage will be deemed part of an insured’s liability policy when the rejection of such coverage does not satisfy statutory and regulatory requirements

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).