Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite State Farm Insurance Company v. Roberts, 398 P.2d 671.

28 citing documents.

Bryan v. Riddel 875 P.2d 131 Ariz. 1994
Bryan v. Riddel 875 P.2d 131 Ariz. 1994
Klaiber v. Orzel 714 P.2d 813 Ariz. 1986
Klaiber v. Orzel 714 P.2d 813 Ariz. 1986
Klaiber v. Orzel 714 P.2d 830 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1985
Klaiber v. Orzel 714 P.2d 830 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1985
relying on the criteria set forth in Dean , the court upheld the trial court’s finding of good cause to produce an adverse party’s statement where the statement was given to the party’s insurer shortly after the accident, the party was unable to recollect the contents of the statement at his sub
Helge v. Druke 666 P.2d 534 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1983
Helge v. Druke 666 P.2d 534 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1983
Longs Drug Stores v. Howe 657 P.2d 412 Ariz. 1983
Longs Drug Stores v. Howe 657 P.2d 412 Ariz. 1983
Camelback Contractors, Inc. v. Industrial Commission 608 P.2d 782 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1980
Camelback Contractors, Inc. v. Industrial Commission 608 P.2d 782 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1980
Willey v.] Whitman, [ , ] to our most recent pronouncement in State Farm [ , ] clearly do not give immunity to evidence because it may be used for impeachment purposes.
State v. Superior Court, in and for Pima County 586 P.2d 1313 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1978
State v. Superior Court, in and for Pima County 586 P.2d 1313 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1978
the respondent court denied the motion.
Butler v. Doyle 544 P.2d 204 Ariz. 1975
Butler v. Doyle 544 P.2d 204 Ariz. 1975
P.2d 671 (1965) a statement given to an adjuster for the insurance carrier was held not to be the work product of the adverse counsel.
MacDonald v. Hyder 471 P.2d 296 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1970
MacDonald v. Hyder 471 P.2d 296 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1970
For the proposition that a party is required to show good cause for the production of records by a non-party witness, , and Kirkpatrick v. Industrial Commission, 10 Ariz.App.
City of Phoenix v. Peterson 462 P.2d 829 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1969
City of Phoenix v. Peterson 462 P.2d 829 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1969
Kirkpatrick v. Industrial Commission 460 P.2d 670 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1969
Kirkpatrick v. Industrial Commission 460 P.2d 670 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1969
Maricopa County v. Peterson 439 P.2d 526 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1968
Maricopa County v. Peterson 439 P.2d 526 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1968
and State Farm Insur *365 , are controlling.
Lawrence v. Burke 431 P.2d 302 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1967
Lawrence v. Burke 431 P.2d 302 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1967
Zimmerman v. Superior Court 402 P.2d 212 Ariz. 1965
Zimmerman v. Superior Court 402 P.2d 212 Ariz. 1965
plaintiff sought to obtain a copy of the statement given by the •defendant to his insurer.