Middlesex Mutual Assurance Co. v. Vaszil, 279 Conn. 28 (2006)
- Citation
- Middlesex Mutual Assurance Co. v. Vaszil, 279 Conn. 28 (2006)
- Parent Document
- Middlesex Mutual Assurance Co. v. Vaszil, 279 Conn. 28 (2006)
- Jurisdiction
- Connecticut (state)
- Effective Date
- 2006-07-11
Other Sections in This Document (26)
- Middlesex Mutual Assurance Co. v. Vaszil, 279 Conn. 28 (2006)
- Middlesex Mutual Assurance Co. v. Vaszil, 279 Conn. 28 (2006)
- Middlesex Mutual Assurance Co. v. Vaszil, 279 Conn. 28 (2006)
- Middlesex Mutual Assurance Co. v. Vaszil, 279 Conn. 28 (2006)
- Middlesex Mutual Assurance Co. v. Vaszil, 279 Conn. 28 (2006)
- Middlesex Mutual Assurance Co. v. Vaszil, 279 Conn. 28 (2006)
- Middlesex Mutual Assurance Co. v. Vaszil, 279 Conn. 28 (2006)
- Middlesex Mutual Assurance Co. v. Vaszil, 279 Conn. 28 (2006)
- Middlesex Mutual Assurance Co. v. Vaszil, 279 Conn. 28 (2006)
- Middlesex Mutual Assurance Co. v. Vaszil, 279 Conn. 28 (2006)
- Middlesex Mutual Assurance Co. v. Vaszil, 279 Conn. 28 (2006)
- Middlesex Mutual Assurance Co. v. Vaszil, 279 Conn. 28 (2006)
- Middlesex Mutual Assurance Co. v. Vaszil, 279 Conn. 28 (2006)
- Middlesex Mutual Assurance Co. v. Vaszil, 279 Conn. 28 (2006)
- Middlesex Mutual Assurance Co. v. Vaszil, 279 Conn. 28 (2006)
- Middlesex Mutual Assurance Co. v. Vaszil, 279 Conn. 28 (2006)
- Middlesex Mutual Assurance Co. v. Vaszil, 279 Conn. 28 (2006)
- Middlesex Mutual Assurance Co. v. Vaszil, 279 Conn. 28 (2006)
- Middlesex Mutual Assurance Co. v. Vaszil, 279 Conn. 28 (2006)
- Middlesex Mutual Assurance Co. v. Vaszil, 279 Conn. 28 (2006)
- Middlesex Mutual Assurance Co. v. Vaszil, 279 Conn. 28 (2006)
- Middlesex Mutual Assurance Co. v. Vaszil, 279 Conn. 28 (2006)
- Middlesex Mutual Assurance Co. v. Vaszil, 279 Conn. 28 (2006)
- Middlesex Mutual Assurance Co. v. Vaszil, 279 Conn. 28 (2006)
- Middlesex Mutual Assurance Co. v. Vaszil, 279 Conn. 28 (2006)
- Middlesex Mutual Assurance Co. v. Vaszil, 279 Conn. 28 (2006)
Full Text
999 charsIn DiLullo v. Joseph, supra, 259 Conn. 851-53, we embraced the leading case for the proposition that there is no right of subrogation against a tenant by a landlord’s insurer in the absence of a specific agreement to the contrary, Sutton v. Jondahl, 532 P.2d 478, 482 (Okla. App. 1975), and concluded, in accordance with the weight of authority, that the Sutton rule is sound as a matter of subrogation law and policy. “The possibility that a lessor’s insurer may proceed against a lessee almost certainly is not within the expectations of most landlords and tenants unless they have been forewarned by expert counseling. When lease provisions are either silent or ambiguous in this regard — and especially when a lessor’s insurance policy is also silent or ambiguous— courts should adopt a rule against allowing the lessor’s insurer to proceed against the tenant. R. Keeton & A. Widiss, Insurance Law (1988) § 4.4 (b), pp. 340-41.” (Internal quotation marks omitted.) DiLullo v. Joseph, supra, 852.