Strickland v. Auto-Owners Insurance

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding, in case involving the identical automobile exclusion, that the language of the exclusion was “clear” and applied broadly to automobile accidents involving the insured’s equipment or drivers
• explaining that “it is a common industry practice for motor common carriers . . . to obtain two separate policies of insurance to provide seamless coverage for different risks: (1) a commercial general liability policy . . . , which excludes motor vehicle liability and (2
• when the appellate record lacks a transcript, “ ‘we must rely on the presumption in favor of the regularity of all proceedings in a court of competent jurisdiction, assume that the evidence was sufficient to support the trial court’s ruling, and affirm the judgment’ ”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).