Search for: "Phenix v. State" Results 1 - 3 of 3
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
9 Aug 2015, 5:23 pm
As stated by the Supreme Court of New Hampshire when interpreting a policy excluding water loss, "[t]o apply the ensuing loss provision to provide coverage for what is essentially a flood would subvert the intent of the parties" (Bates v Phenix Mut. [read post]
27 Feb 2012, 12:38 pm by Steve Hall
Supreme Court's ruling in Maples v. [read post]
13 Dec 2015, 6:59 am by Mark S. Humphreys
That question is addressed in a 1967, Corpus Christi Court of Appeals case styled, Phoenix Insurance Company v. [read post]