Uriah Steffen, et al, v. Alfa Vision Insurance Corp. - 8/25/14

Back to TopPrintE-mail
Monday  August 25, 2014 
1:30 PM  EST

1:30 p.m. 67A05-1312-CC-617. Uriah Steffen and Travis Shoulders appeal the trial court’s entry of summary judgment for Alfa Vision Insurance Corporation (“Alfa”) on Alfa’s cross-claim against Shoulders and third-party complaint against Steffen for declaratory judgment. Steffen and Shoulders raise two issues for our review, namely: (1) whether Indiana Code Section 27-7-6-5 requires an insurance company to wait to give a notice of cancellation of an automobile insurance policy for nonpayment of premium until after the insured in fact fails to pay the premium; and (2) whether Alfa either waived its right to deny coverage or is estopped from denying coverage either because it had previously reinstated the insured’s policy after late payments were made or because Alfa had accepted those late payments in full and without any credit or refund to the insured.

Back to Events
Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Indiana State Bar Association

Indianapolis Bar Association

Evansville Bar Association

Allen County Bar Association

Indiana Lawyer on Facebook

facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. KUDOS to the Indiana Supreme Court for realizing that some bureacracies need to go to the stake. Recall what RWR said: "No government ever voluntarily reduces itself in size. Government programs, once launched, never disappear. Actually, a government bureau is the nearest thing to eternal life we'll ever see on this earth!" NOW ... what next to this rare and inspiring chopping block? Well, the Commission on Gender and Race (but not religion!?!) is way overdue. And some other Board's could be cut with a positive for State and the reputation of the Indiana judiciary.

  2. During a visit where an informant with police wears audio and video, does the video necessary have to show hand to hand transaction of money and narcotics?

  3. I will agree with that as soon as law schools stop lying to prospective students about salaries and employment opportunities in the legal profession. There is no defense to the fraudulent numbers first year salaries they post to mislead people into going to law school.

  4. The sad thing is that no fish were thrown overboard The "greenhorn" who had never fished before those 5 days was interrogated for over 4 hours by 5 officers until his statement was illicited, "I don't want to go to prison....." The truth is that these fish were measured frozen off shore and thawed on shore. The FWC (state) officer did not know fish shrink, so the only reason that these fish could be bigger was a swap. There is no difference between a 19 1/2 fish or 19 3/4 fish, short fish is short fish, the ticket was written. In addition the FWC officer testified at trial, he does not measure fish in accordance with federal law. There was a document prepared by the FWC expert that said yes, fish shrink and if these had been measured correctly they averaged over 20 inches (offshore frozen). This was a smoke and mirror prosecution.

  5. I love this, Dave! Many congrats to you! We've come a long way from studying for the bar together! :)

ADVERTISEMENT