Cited by

Ass’n, 260 Ariz. at 383 ¶ 30 (recognizing an HOA’s ability to pursue construction defect claims through assignment of homeowners’ claims under the implied warranty of workmanship and habitability); ¶ 6 (2008) (stating unliquidated non-personal injury claims are generally assignable).

¶14 Although the common law at one time reflected a broad prohibition on assignment of claims, that “prohibition on assignment gradually became the exception rather than the rule.” –66 ¶¶ 6–13 (2008).

¶ 32 (2008) (describing the Morris rule, “that a stipulated judgment may bind the insurer arises from the insurer’s contractual obligations to defend and indemnify its insured”).

See 1800 Ocotillo, L.L.C. v. WLB Grp., Inc., ¶ 7 (2008) (“Contract provisions are unenforceable if they violate legislation or other identifiable public policy.”) ( ¶ 13 (2008), and Restatement (Second) of Contracts § 178 (Am.

have to do with whether the defendant breached the applicable standard of care, not whether a duty and attendant standard exist.”); ¶ 20, (emphasis added) (citations omitted) (noting Sw.

Consequently, in Arizona, insurance agents owe “a duty of ‘reasonable care, skill, and diligence’ in dealing with clients.” ¶ 20, (quoting Darner, 140 Ariz. at 397, 682 P.2d at 402); ¶ 6, (holding that an insurance agent’s compliance with A.R.S.

¶ 18, Darner Motor Sales, 140 Ariz. at 397, 682 P.2d at 402.

Agency, ¶ 33, (quoting Ramsey Air Meds, LLC v. Cutter Aviation, Inc., ¶ 27, P.3d 275 (2008)).

190 P.3d at 737, (unliquidated non-personal injury claims are generally assignable); see also Highland Village Partners, L.L.C. v. Bradbury & Stamm Constr.

Agency, P.3d 3 In the absence of prior decisions to the contrary, we may seek guidance from the Restatement when it is applicable.

Estate of DeSela, 224 Ariz. at 204 ¶ 8, 228 P.3d at 940 ; , 366 ¶ 13, (discussing assignment of causes of action).

While "Arizona case law generally allows the assignment of unliquidated legal claims except those involving personal injury,” 116 , such an assignment is permitted when a parent assigns a minor the right to recover medical expenses.

¶ 13, 369 ¶ 35, 281 (2008) (holding that public policy does not bar clients’ assignment of negligence claims against their insurance agents); Restatement (Second) of Contracts § 178 (1981).

364 ¶ 6, (noting that unliquidated non-personal injury claims are generally assignable).

As the supreme court recently reiterated, our courts “have long allowed the assignment of various choses in action.” -65, ¶¶ 8, 14-16 , -78 (2008) (addressing assignability of existing professional negligence claim against insurance agent); 6A C.J.S.