Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite Rawlings v. Apodaca, 726 P.2d 565.

327 citing documents.

Volz v. Coleman Co., Inc. 748 P.2d 1191 Ariz. 1987
Haldiman v. Gosnell Development Corp. 748 P.2d 1209 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1987
Jacobson v. Superior Court 743 P.2d 410 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1987
Jacobson v. Superior Court 743 P.2d 410 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1987
United Services Automobile Ass'n v. Morris 741 P.2d 246 Ariz. 1987
Boy v. Fremont Indemnity Co. 742 P.2d 835 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1987
Boy v. Fremont Indemnity Co. 742 P.2d 835 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1987
[is] bound to refrain from any action which would impair the benefits which the other ha[s] the right to expect from the contract or the contractual relationship.”
Arizona Property & Casualty Insurance Guaranty Fund v. Helme 735 P.2d 451 Ariz. 1987
Arizona Property & Casualty Insurance Guaranty Fund v. Helme 735 P.2d 451 Ariz. 1987
In purchasing an insurance company’s express agreement to pay covered claims, the insured is buying “security from financial loss which he may sustain from claims against him....”
Hawkins v. Allstate Insurance 733 P.2d 1073 Ariz. 1987
Hawkins v. Allstate Insurance 733 P.2d 1073 Ariz. 1987
Gurule v. Illinois Mutual Life & Casualty Co. 734 P.2d 85 Ariz. 1987
Filasky v. Preferred Risk Mutual Insurance 734 P.2d 76 Ariz. 1987
Gurule v. Illinois Mutual Life & Casualty Co. 734 P.2d 85 Ariz. 1987
Filasky v. Preferred Risk Mutual Insurance 734 P.2d 76 Ariz. 1987
Coldwell Banker Commercial Group, Inc. v. Camelback Office Park 751 P.2d 530 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1987
Coldwell Banker Commercial Group, Inc. v. Camelback Office Park 751 P.2d 530 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1987
(holding that an obligation of good faith is implied in all contracts).
Ranburger v. Southern Pacific Transportation Co. 760 P.2d 547 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1986
Ranburger v. Southern Pacific Transportation Co. 760 P.2d 547 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1986
the court established a new standard which must be met by a plaintiff before punitive damages can be awarded.
Bradshaw v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance 758 P.2d 1312 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1986
Bradshaw v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance 758 P.2d 1312 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1986
and Linthicum v. Nationwide Life Ins.
Trus Joist Corp. v. Safeco Insurance Co. of America 735 P.2d 125 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1986
Trus Joist Corp. v. Safeco Insurance Co. of America 735 P.2d 125 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1986
Finally, , the court again noted, citing both Gruenberg and Noble , that there is no real distinction between the prohibition in first-party cases against challenging an insured’s claim unless it is fairly debatable and the obligation in third-party cases to give equal consideration to the insured’s intere
Ward v. Fireman's Fund Insurance Companies 731 P.2d 106 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1986
Ward v. Fireman's Fund Insurance Companies 731 P.2d 106 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1986
Absent evidence of compliance with the requisite standard of care, it cannot be said an insurer is entitled to summary judgment as a matter of law based solely on its subjective belief and assertion the insured’s claim is “fairly debatable.” See generally
Linthicum v. Nationwide Life Insurance 723 P.2d 675 Ariz. 1986
Linthicum v. Nationwide Life Insurance 723 P.2d 675 Ariz. 1986
To recover punitive damages something more is required over and above the “mere commission of a tort.” , Prosser & Keeton, supra, § 2 at 9-10.