Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite Linthicum v. Nationwide Life Insurance, 723 P.2d 675.

144 citing documents.

Soto v. Ten Bridges Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2025
Soto v. Ten Bridges Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2025
Beck v. Neville Ariz. 2024
Beck v. Neville Ariz. 2024
Co., -32 (1986) (applying heightened standard of proof to punitive damages claims); O’Hair v. O’Hair, (requiring clear and convincing proof to establish donative intent for a gift).
Kunasek v. Johnson Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
Kunasek v. Johnson Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
Swift Transportation Co of Az v. Hon. Carman Ariz. 2022
Swift Transportation Co of Az v. Hon. Carman Ariz. 2022
¶13 published one day later and similarly involving an insurance bad faith claim, echoed Rawlings.
AMY PURDY v. HON. D. DOUGLAS METCALF Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2021
AMY PURDY v. HON. D. DOUGLAS METCALF Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2021
6 PURDY v. METCALF Opinion of the Court (“The wrongdoer must be consciously aware of the wrongfulness or harmfulness of his conduct and yet continue to act in the same manner in deliberate contravention to the rights of the victim.”).
Connell v. Connell, III Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
Connell v. Connell, III Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
Tarter v. Bendt Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
Tarter v. Bendt Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
B of A/swartz v. Avwga Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
B of A/swartz v. Avwga Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Hart v. Biederbeck Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Hart v. Biederbeck Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Atkins v. Snell & Wilmer Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Atkins v. Snell & Wilmer Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Preciado v. Young America Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
Preciado v. Young America Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
Rochon v. Grant Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
Rochon v. Grant Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
Co., -32, -81 (1986); Thompson, 171 Ariz. at 557, 832 P.2d at 210.
Sabatina v. Cook Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
Sabatina v. Cook Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
Sobieski v. American Standard Insurance Co. 382 P.3d 89 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
Sobieski v. American Standard Insurance Co. 382 P.3d 89 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
Newman v. Select Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
Newman v. Select Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
Co., see also Rawlings, 151 Ariz. at 162.
Desert Palm Surgical Group, P.L.C. v. Petta 343 P.3d 438 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
Desert Palm Surgical Group, P.L.C. v. Petta 343 P.3d 438 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
Orca Communications v. Ann Noder Et vir/pitch Public 337 P.3d 545 Ariz. 2014
Orca Communications v. Ann Noder Et vir/pitch Public 337 P.3d 545 Ariz. 2014
Felipe v. Theme Tech Corp. 334 P.3d 210 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
Felipe v. Theme Tech Corp. 334 P.3d 210 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
US Express v. Leland Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
US Express v. Leland Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
Nardelli v. Metropolitan Group Property & Casualty Insurance 277 P.3d 789 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2012
Nardelli v. Metropolitan Group Property & Casualty Insurance 277 P.3d 789 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2012
Cal X-Tra v. W.V.S v. Holdings, L.L.C. 276 P.3d 11 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2012
Cal X-Tra v. W.V.S v. Holdings, L.L.C. 276 P.3d 11 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2012
Co., -31 , -80 (1986), much of the evidence relied on by 10K for its argument depends on the context in which the evidence is viewed, and we cannot say that it is so overwhelming as to require finding any error harmless.
Mendoza v. McDonald's Corp. 213 P.3d 288 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2009
Mendoza v. McDonald's Corp. 213 P.3d 288 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2009
Quintero v. Rodgers 212 P.3d 874 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2009
Quintero v. Rodgers 212 P.3d 874 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2009
Co., , (“LPjunitive damages are those damages awarded in excess of full compensation to the victim.”).
Hudgins v. SOUTHWEST AIRLINES, CO. 212 P.3d 810 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2009
Hudgins v. SOUTHWEST AIRLINES, CO. 212 P.3d 810 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2009
Strawberry Water Co. v. Paulsen 207 P.3d 654 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2008
Security Title Agency, Inc. v. Pope 200 P.3d 977 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2008