BINOTTO et al v. GEICO ADVANTAGE INSURANCE COMPANY et al
Filing 70
OPINION - The Court finds that no material issues of fact exist, and that Concord is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Plaintiff Donald Binotto was not occupying Anthony Binotto's Concord-insured truck at the time of the accident. Concor d's Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 45 ) is GRANTED. Accordingly, Geico's Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (ECF No. 47 ) is DENIED. Plaintiffs are entitled to UM benefits under the policy issued by Geico Advantage Insurance Company. Plaintiffs are not entitled to UM benefits under the policy issued by Concord, and as more fully stated in the Opinion. Signed by Judge Stephanie L. Haines on 9/25/2024. (dlg)
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
