In an underinsured-motorist case in which the plaintiff's insurance company claims that the defendant possessed coverage and was not, in fact, underinsured, a court can reject the plaintiff's argument that proof of payment is required and that proof of insurance coverage is insufficient.
Font Size: 
Murray v. Simmons
Superior Court
February 4, 2013
This article requires premium access
This article requires premium access to Connecticut Law Tribune. Please sign in or subscribe to read the full text.
