Cited by
Opinions in Arizona that cite Love v. Farmers Insurance Group, 588 P.2d 364.
- State v. Daniel Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
- State v. Daniel Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
- Best Western v. Oakland Park Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
- Best Western v. Oakland Park Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
- Betancourt v. Phoenix Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
-
Betancourt v. Phoenix
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
Grp., nor is it “precluded from reconsidering an earlier decision when a substantial change occurs in .
- United v. Associated Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
-
United v. Associated
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
Grp., (holding vehicle owner’s assault by criminals who abducted him in the insured vehicle and beat him to death with candelabrum found in the vehicle did not arise out of the use of the vehicle; “For purposes of this essential causal relationship .
- Sholes v. Fernando Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2011
- Sholes v. Fernando 268 P.3d 1112 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2011
- Sholes v. Fernando Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2011
- Sholes v. Fernando 268 P.3d 1112 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2011
- Hall v. Smith Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2007
-
Hall v. Smith
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2007
As Smith points out, however, “‘the rule is one of procedure, not of substance.
- State v. Whelan 91 P.3d 1011 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2004
- State v. Whelan 91 P.3d 1011 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2004
- State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance v. Loesl 977 P.2d 140 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1999
- State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance v. Loesl 977 P.2d 140 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1999
- Tobel v. Travelers Insurance 988 P.2d 148 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1999
-
Tobel v. Travelers Insurance
988 P.2d 148
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1999
Group, , Brenner v. Aetna Ins.
- Benevides v. AZ PROPERTY & CAS. INS. 911 P.2d 616 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1995
- Benevides v. Arizona Property & Casualty Insurance Guaranty Fund 911 P.2d 616 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1995
- Benevides v. AZ PROPERTY & CAS. INS. 911 P.2d 616 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1995
- Benevides v. Arizona Property & Casualty Insurance Guaranty Fund 911 P.2d 616 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1995
- State v. King 883 P.2d 1024 Ariz. 1994
-
State v. King
883 P.2d 1024
Ariz. 1994
Group, , and rule 16.1(d).
- Ruiz v. Farmers Ins. Co. of Arizona 865 P.2d 762 Ariz. 1993
- Ruiz v. Farmers Ins. Co. of Arizona 865 P.2d 762 Ariz. 1993
- Powell-Cerkoney v. TCR-Montana Ranch Joint Venture 860 P.2d 1328 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1993
- Powell-Cerkoney v. TCR-Montana Ranch Joint Venture 860 P.2d 1328 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1993
- Ruiz v. Farmers Ins. Co. of Arizona 847 P.2d 111 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1993
-
Ruiz v. Farmers Ins. Co. of Arizona
847 P.2d 111
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1993
However, Arizona courts on several occasions have considered the general issue of when an injury arises out of the ownership, maintenance or use of a vehicle: , , , Vanguard Insurance Co. v. Cantrell, 18 Ariz.App.
- Stuart v. Insurance Co. of North America 730 P.2d 255 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1986
- Stuart v. Insurance Co. of North America 730 P.2d 255 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1986
- Linthicum v. Nationwide Life Insurance 723 P.2d 703 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1985
- Linthicum v. Nationwide Life Insurance 723 P.2d 703 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1985
- North Star Development Corp. v. Wolfswinkel 706 P.2d 732 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1985
- North Star Development Corp. v. Wolfswinkel 706 P.2d 732 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1985
- Occidental Chemical Co. v. Connor 604 P.2d 605 Ariz. 1979
- Occidental Chemical Co. v. Connor 604 P.2d 605 Ariz. 1979