Opinion · Supreme Court of the United States
Nationwide Mutual Insurance v. Cisneros
516 U.S. 1140
- Type
- Opinion
- Court
- Supreme Court of the United States
- Jurisdiction
- Federal
- Date
- 1996-02-20
- Topic
- commercial
How later courts describe this case
- concluding that claims against the hazard insurance industry do not fall within the scope of the FHA
- holding that the term occurrence was defined to mean “any happening or series of happenings, arising out of or due to one event taking place during the term of this contract...”
- observing that an unsecured creditor can be better off when the debtor defaults rather than paying off its debt
- finding that the availability of private civil actions and unlimited punitive damages under the Fair Housing Act (“FHA”
- “the presence of additional remedies in the Fair Housing Act does not cause the Act to invalidate, impair or supersede Ohio insurance law.”
Citator
UpLaw has not yet analyzed Nationwide Mutual Insurance v. Cisneros. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.
- Cited by
- 37 opinions
C. A. 6th Cir. Motions of National Association of Insurance Commissioners, National Association of Independent Insurers, National Association of Mutual Insurance Companies et al., and Washington Legal Foundation et al. for leave to file briefs as amici curiae granted. Certiorari denied.