Tag Archives | Ontario

Minnesota is an “Inadequately Insured Motorist”

The Court of Appeal for Ontario has held that a Minnesota tortfeasor with only $500,000 liability limits is an “inadequately insured motorist” under the Family Protection Endorsement (OPCF 44R) in Ontario, where the 44R limits are $1 million. In Hartley v.

The post Minnesota is an “Inadequately Insured Motorist” appeared first on insBlogs.

Minnesota is an “Inadequately Insured Motorist”

The Court of Appeal for Ontario has held that a Minnesota tortfeasor with only $500,000 liability limits is an “inadequately insured motorist” under the Family Protection Endorsement (OPCF 44R) in Ontario, where the 44R limits are $1 million. In Hartley v.

The post Minnesota is an “Inadequately Insured Motorist” appeared first on insBlogs.

Minnesota is an “Inadequately Insured Motorist”

The Court of Appeal for Ontario has held that a Minnesota tortfeasor with only $500,000 liability limits is an “inadequately insured motorist” under the Family Protection Endorsement (OPCF 44R) in Ontario, where the 44R limits are $1 million. In Hartley v.

The post Minnesota is an “Inadequately Insured Motorist” appeared first on insBlogs.

Minnesota is an “Inadequately Insured Motorist”

The Court of Appeal for Ontario has held that a Minnesota tortfeasor with only $500,000 liability limits is an “inadequately insured motorist” under the Family Protection Endorsement (OPCF 44R) in Ontario, where the 44R limits are $1 million. In Hartley v.

The post Minnesota is an “Inadequately Insured Motorist” appeared first on insBlogs.

Minnesota is an “Inadequately Insured Motorist”

The Court of Appeal for Ontario has held that a Minnesota tortfeasor with only $500,000 liability limits is an “inadequately insured motorist” under the Family Protection Endorsement (OPCF 44R) in Ontario, where the 44R limits are $1 million. In Hartley v.

The post Minnesota is an “Inadequately Insured Motorist” appeared first on insBlogs.

Minnesota is an “Inadequately Insured Motorist”

The Court of Appeal for Ontario has held that a Minnesota tortfeasor with only $500,000 liability limits is an “inadequately insured motorist” under the Family Protection Endorsement (OPCF 44R) in Ontario, where the 44R limits are $1 million. In Hartley v.

The post Minnesota is an “Inadequately Insured Motorist” appeared first on insBlogs.

Minnesota is an “Inadequately Insured Motorist”

The Court of Appeal for Ontario has held that a Minnesota tortfeasor with only $500,000 liability limits is an “inadequately insured motorist” under the Family Protection Endorsement (OPCF 44R) in Ontario, where the 44R limits are $1 million. In Hartley v.

The post Minnesota is an “Inadequately Insured Motorist” appeared first on insBlogs.

Trip and Fall? Better Land on a Car

The License Appeal Tribunal has held that a person who tripped over stone blocks and fell into a parked Honda vehicle was involved in an “accident”, making him entitled to receive accident benefit under the Statutory Accident Benefits Schedule. In

The post Trip and Fall? Better Land on a Car appeared first on insBlogs.

Trip and Fall? Better Land on a Car

The License Appeal Tribunal has held that a person who tripped over stone blocks and fell into a parked Honda vehicle was involved in an “accident”, making him entitled to receive accident benefit under the Statutory Accident Benefits Schedule. In

The post Trip and Fall? Better Land on a Car appeared first on insBlogs.

Trip and Fall? Better Land on a Car

The License Appeal Tribunal has held that a person who tripped over stone blocks and fell into a parked Honda vehicle was involved in an “accident”, making him entitled to receive accident benefit under the Statutory Accident Benefits Schedule. In

The post Trip and Fall? Better Land on a Car appeared first on insBlogs.

Diag| Memory: Current usage: 34744 KB
Diag| Memory: Peak usage: 35011 KB