The Insurer issued an Auto Policy and an Umbrella Policy. The Auto Policy provided $100,000 of UIM coverage and the Umbrella Policy provided $2,000,000 of UIM coverage. Just like ARS § 12-555(C)(2),the Auto Policy barred UIM...more
The Holding -
In Fisher v. USAA Casualty Insurance Company, 2018 WL 3804114 (Ariz. App. Aug. 7, 2018), a case arising from an underinsured motorist (“UIM”) arbitration, the Arizona Court of Appeals affirmed the trial...more
The Holding -
In Hanfelder v. Geico Indem. Co., WL 2018 WL 2315949 (May 22, 2018), the Arizona Court of Appeals reversed summary judgment granted to an Insurer because the Policy’s “imprecise” anti-stacking language did...more
6/11/2018
/ Affiliates ,
Anti-Stacking Provisions ,
Appeals ,
Commercial Insurance Policies ,
Contract Drafting ,
Declaratory Rulings ,
Insurance Industry ,
Insurance Litigation ,
Policy Terms ,
Reversal ,
Summary Judgment ,
Uninsured and Under-Insured Motorists
Although the Arizona Court of Appeals resolved this issue 20 years ago, I frequently see insureds' counsel argue that an insurer must pay the "undisputed amount" of a UM or UIM claim—and I just saw this argument last week—so...more
In Sobieski v. Am. Standard Ins. Co. of Wisconsin, 2016 WL 5436588 (Ariz.App. Sept. 29, 2016), despite upholding a bad faith judgment for an insurer conducting an unreasonable investigation and denying a claim, the Arizona...more
10/21/2016
/ Appeals ,
Arbitration ,
Auto Insurance ,
Bad Faith ,
Breach of Contract ,
Business Profits ,
Comparative Negligence ,
Denial of Insurance Coverage ,
Insurance Adjusters ,
Insurance Litigation ,
Judgment As A Matter Of Law ,
Jury Verdicts ,
Motion for Judgment ,
Motorcycle Accidents ,
Punitive Damages ,
Reversal ,
Uninsured and Under-Insured Motorists
If the Beaver owned a classic 1959 Ford Fairlane, he would not have been insured for UIM benefits under the Cleaver family auto policy. In Beaver v. American Family Mutual Insurance Company, 234 Ariz. 584, 324 P.3d 870 (App....more
In Newman v. Cornerstone National Insurance Company, 2014 WL 1257129 (Ariz.App. Mar. 27, 2014), the Arizona Court of Appeals held that a valid offer of underinsured motorist (“UIM”) coverage need not include premium prices...more
In Melendez v. Hallmark Insurance Company, 232 Ariz. 327, 305 P.3d 392 (June 11, 2013), the Arizona Court of Appeals held a UM/UIM selection/rejection form is not a valid “offer” under Arizona’s Uninsured Motorist Act, which...more
In Mendota Insurance Company v. Gallegos, 232 Ariz. 126, 302 P.3d 651, 657 (2013), the Arizona Court of Appeals recently held a named insured's younger brother was a resident of his brother's household and therefore entitled...more