holding that the PCIGC could not pursue a claim for indemnity against insolvent insurer's insurer because the claimant the PCIGC had paid was not a resident of Maryland, and therefore the claim was not a "covered claim" and the PCIGC could not step into the insolvent insurer's shoes
How later courts described this case
- holding that the PCIGC could not pursue a claim for indemnity against insolvent insurer's insurer because the claimant the PCIGC had paid was not a resident of Maryland, and therefore the claim was not a "covered claim" and the PCIGC could not step into the insolvent insurer's shoes
- discussing concerns of General Assembly and aims of 1986 enactments
- the United States is not domiciled in all 50 states under Maryland law
- uses the phrase “words of the statute” to refer to all of the words
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
ELDRIDGE, Judge,
dissenting:
For the reasons set forth in Judge Bloom’s opinion for the Court of Special Appeals, Ward v. Property & Casualty, 85 Md.App. 421 , 584 A.2d 115 (1991), I would affirm.