Lloyds of London v. Lock
| Decision Date | 02 November 1983 |
| Docket Number | No. 1-982A268,1-982A268 |
| Citation | 455 N.E.2d 967 |
| Parties | LLOYDS OF LONDON and Michael George Miller, Defendants-Appellants, v. Charles LOCK d/b/a Charles Lock Trucking, Plaintiff-Appellee. |
| Court | Indiana Appellate Court |
Appeal from Dearborn Circuit Court, Dearborn County; Lester G. Baker, judge.
Jerry P. Belknap, James A. Strain, James E. Mahoney, Barnes & Thornburg, Indianapolis, Harvey M. Greene, Aurora, for defendants-appellants.
Bobby Jay Small, Indianapolis, William R. Wilson, Frank G. Kramer, Ewbank, Meyer, Kramer & Bush, Lawrenceburg, for plaintiff-appellee.
ON PETITION FOR REHEARING
The previous opinion issued, 454 N.E.2d 81, is modified to the extent that the appellants' liability is not to exceed the limits of the insurance policy. The petition for rehearing is denied in all other respects.
To continue reading
Request your trial
4 cases
-
Kellogg v. City of Gary
...damage award cannot stand. The citizens' reliance on Lloyds of London v. Lock (1983), Ind.App., 454 N.E.2d 81, modified on reh'g, 455 N.E.2d 967, and Town of Rome City v. King (1983), Ind.App., 450 N.E.2d 72, for the proposition that all damages need not be proven with absolute mathematical......
-
Burleson v. Illinois Farmers Ins. Co., IP88-318-C.
...Lloyds decision "to the extent that the appellants' liability is not to exceed the limits of the insurance policy." Lloyds of London v. Lock, 455 N.E.2d 967 (Ind.App. 1983). Unfortunately the court there did not offer any explanation of its decision, so the Lloyds case is of little value in......
-
Nahmias Realty, Inc. v. Cohen
...Inc. v. Thielbar (1984), Ind.App., 467 N.E.2d 433, 438; Lloyds of London v. Lock (1983), Ind.App., 454 N.E.2d 81, 83, modified at 455 N.E.2d 967; Colonial Discount Corp. v. Berkhardt (1982), Ind.App., 435 N.E.2d 65, 67. Where there is doubt as to the exact proof of damages, such uncertainty......
-
Indiana Ins. Co. v. Plummer Power Mower & Tool Rental, Inc.
...Insurer contends the award of consequential damages should be overturned for three reasons. First, citing Lloyds of London v. Lock (1983), Ind.App., 455 N.E.2d 967, Insurer argues an award of damages cannot exceed the limits of the Plummers' policy. Second, citing Burleson v. Illinois Farme......