Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite Lennar Corp. v. Auto-Owners Insurance, 151 P.3d 538.

26 citing documents.

Truck v. Teixidor Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
Truck v. Teixidor Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
Co., ¶ 31 (App. 2007) (citing U.S. Fid.
Aguilera v. Sannes Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
Aguilera v. Sannes Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
Co., ¶ 23 (App. 2007) (citation omitted).
Dennis Teufel v. American family/kerry Hanson Ariz. 2018
Teufel v. Am. Family Mut. Ins. Co. 419 P.3d 546 Ariz. 2018
Teufel v. Am. Family Mut. Ins. Co. 419 P.3d 546 Ariz. 2018
260-61 ¶ 11, , 543-44 (App. 2007) (stating that a duty to defend exists when the third-party suit "alleg[es] facts that, if true, would give rise to coverage, even though there would ultimately be no obligation to indemnify if the facts giving rise to coverage were not established").
Dennis Teufel v. American family/kerry Hanson Ariz. 2018
Ins., ¶ 27 (2014); –61 ¶ 11 (App. 2007) (stating that a duty to defend exists when the third-party suit “alleg[es] facts that, if true, would give rise to coverage, even though there would ultimately be no obligation to indemnify if the facts giving rise to coverage were not established”).
Teufel v. American Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
Teufel v. American Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
And the parties agree that the policy, consistent with United States Fidelity & Guaranty Corp. v. Advance Roofing & Supply Co., Inc., ¶ 17 (App. 2007), does not cover defective workmanship standing alone.
Double AA Builders, Ltd. v. Preferred Contractors Insurance Co. 386 P.3d 1277 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
Double AA Builders, Ltd. v. Preferred Contractors Insurance Co. 386 P.3d 1277 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
¶¶ 19-20 , (holding that faulty workmanship that causes property damage, not just faulty workmanship, constitutes an “occurrence” under the CGL policy) , (
KB Home Tucson, Inc. v. Charter Oak Fire Insurance 340 P.3d 405 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
KB Home Tucson, Inc. v. Charter Oak Fire Insurance 340 P.3d 405 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
Co., P.3d 538 (App. 2007), in finding that KB was not entitled to coverage.
Colorado Casualty Insurance v. Safety Control Co. 288 P.3d 764 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2012
Colorado Casualty Insurance v. Safety Control Co. 288 P.3d 764 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2012
Co., ¶ 11 , Salerno v. Atlantic Mut.
Lennar Corp. v. Transamerica Insurance 256 P.3d 635 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2011
Lennar Corp. v. Transamerica Insurance 256 P.3d 635 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2011
Desert Mountain Properties Ltd. Partnership v. Liberty Mutual Fire Insurance 236 P.3d 421 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2010
Desert Mountain Properties Ltd. Partnership v. Liberty Mutual Fire Insurance 236 P.3d 421 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2010
Co., ¶ 17 , (distinguishing between “faulty workmanship standing alone,” which is not covered because it is not an occurrence under the standard CGL policy, and “faulty workmanship that causes damage to property,” which may implicate coverage.)
MT BUILDERS, LLC v. Fisher Roofing Inc. 197 P.3d 758 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2008
MT BUILDERS, LLC v. Fisher Roofing Inc. 197 P.3d 758 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2008
Haroutunian v. Valueoptions Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2008
Haroutunian v. Valueoptions Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2008
Co., see Federoff v. Pioneer Title & Trust Co., (appellate court will sustain trial court’s factual findings unless “clearly erroneous or unsupported by any credible evidence”); (1984
Regal Homes, Inc. v. CNA Insurance 171 P.3d 610 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2007
Regal Homes, Inc. v. CNA Insurance 171 P.3d 610 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2007
Co., ¶ 11 , (“[T]he insurer would have the duty to defend a suit alleging facts that, if true, would give rise to coverage, even though there would ultimately be no obligation to indemnify if the facts giving rise to coverage were not established.