Search for: "Richards v. Allstate Insurance" Results 1 - 20 of 37
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
8 May 2020, 12:12 pm by Daily Record Staff
Administrative law — Maryland Insurance Administration — Case caption Richard Afolabi-Brown, appellant, filed a complaint with the Maryland Insurance Administration’s Policy and Casualty Unit (P&C Unit) alleging that Allstate Insurance Company, appellee, had failed to fully pay his claim for water damage to his home and had improperly increased his homeowner’s insurance premium because of ... [read post]
13 Apr 2007, 5:15 am
But he added that Allstate shouldn't get credit for money supplied by federal government through the flood insurance program. [read post]
9 Jun 2019, 2:22 pm by Daily Record Staff
., Richard Lionel Hall, and their automobile liability insurance carriers, Allstate Insurance Company and USAA General Indemnity Company, respectively, initiated an interpleader action in the Circuit Court for Wicomico County, the underlying reasons for which we shall discuss, infra. [read post]
28 Feb 2008, 2:38 pm
Their insurance company contends that their underinsured motorist insurance policy subjects any amount the wife and children can recover for their emotional distress to the per person liability cap applicable to Richard. [read post]
5 Dec 2022, 11:25 am by Picl Guest Blogger
The smallest of these companies in terms of market capitalization, Allstate, currently has a market cap 800 times larger than Heritage Insurance ($35 billion compared to $43 million). [read post]
21 Dec 2010, 8:52 am by Amanda Frost
Allstate Insurance Co. [read post]
24 Aug 2015, 5:01 pm by Law Lady
RICHARD STONE, M.D., et al., Appellees. 3rd District.Wrongful death -- Product liability -- TobaccoDIANA PAPPAS, as Personal Representative of the Estate of MINA PAPPAS, Deceased, Appellant/Cross-Appellee, v. [read post]
19 Oct 2010, 9:53 am by A. Benjamin Spencer
Allstate Insurance, the Court acknowledges that a class action often alters dramatically the incidence of claiming but, for purposes of the Rules Enabling Act, the Court deems this effect to be merely “incidental. [read post]