Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite Ballesteros v. American Standard Insurance, 248 P.3d 193.

62 citing documents.

JOSEPH E. TERBORG v. TOWN OF PAYSON Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2025
JOSEPH E. TERBORG v. TOWN OF PAYSON Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2025
State Farm v. Balzan Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
State Farm v. Balzan Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
Co. of Wis., ¶ 17 (2011) (“[I]t is not our place to rewrite [§ 20-259.01].”).
Nicaise v. Hon Bernick 542 P.3d 258 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
Nicaise v. Hon Bernick 542 P.3d 258 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
Co. of Wisc., ¶ 17 (2011) (“[I]t is not our place to rewrite the statute.”).
Do v. Board of Regents Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
Co. of Wisc., ¶ 17 (2011).
Kay Franklin v. Csaa General Insurance Ariz. 2023
Kay Franklin v. Csaa General Insurance Ariz. 2023
Co. of Wis., ¶ 9, 349–50 ¶ 20 (2011), the forms do not operate as a statutory limit on the amount of UIM coverage a policy may provide.
Ariz. Chapter of the Associated Gen. Contractors of Am. v. City of Phx. 445 P.3d 2 Ariz. 2019
Ariz. Chapter of the Associated Gen. Contractors of Am. v. City of Phx. 445 P.3d 2 Ariz. 2019
Co. of Wis., ¶ 15 (2011) (stating that including a requirement for Spanish-language forms in some statutes but not in A.R.S.
Sunflower v. Ahcccs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Sunflower v. Ahcccs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Co. of Wisc., ¶ 7 (2011) (statutes); 4 SUNFLOWER v. AHCCCS Decision of the Court Gutierrez v. Indus.
State Ex Rel Brnovich v. City of tucson/dewit 399 P.3d 663 Ariz. 2017
Marika Delgado v. Manor Care of Tucson 395 P.3d 698 Ariz. 2017
Marika Delgado v. Manor Care of Tucson 395 P.3d 698 Ariz. 2017
Co. of Wis., ¶ 17 (2011) (stating “[i]f the legislature desires to add [] a requirement [to A.R.S.
Wells Fargo v. Hoag Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
Wells Fargo v. Hoag Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
Co. of Wis., ¶ 17 (2011) (same).
Tanya K. v. Department of Child Safety 377 P.3d 351 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
Tanya K. v. Department of Child Safety 377 P.3d 351 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
Co. of Wisconsin, -50, ¶ 20 , -98 (2011) (court may rely on non-legislator’s statements if circumstances provide sufficient guarantees that the statements reflect legislative intent).
Murray v. Farmers Insurance Company of Arizona .... 366 P.3d 117 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2016
Murray v. Farmers Insurance Company of Arizona .... 366 P.3d 117 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2016
Respect the Promise in Opposition to R-14-02-Neighbors for a Better Glendale v. Hanna 360 P.3d 92 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
Followed Respect the Promise in Opposition to R-14-02-Neighbors for a Better Glendale v. Hanna 360 P.3d 92 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
Co. of Wis., ¶ 7 (2011) (internal quotations and citations omitted).
Hague v. Bill Houston Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
Hague v. Bill Houston Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2015
Co. of Wis., ¶ 22, (rejecting imposing a comprehension requirement onto § 20-259.01, despite its “remedial” nature).
Wilks Et Vir v. Manobianco 352 P.3d 912 Ariz. 2015
Wilks Et Vir v. Manobianco 352 P.3d 912 Ariz. 2015
Katelin Newman v. Cornerstone National Insurance Company Dba Freedom National Insurance Services Ariz. 2015
Katelin Newman v. Cornerstone National Insurance Company Dba Freedom National Insurance Services 344 P.3d 337 Ariz. 2015
Katelin Newman v. Cornerstone National Insurance Company Dba Freedom National Insurance Services 344 P.3d 337 Ariz. 2015
Katelin Newman v. Cornerstone National Insurance Company Dba Freedom National Insurance Services Ariz. 2015
CSA 13-101 Loop, LLC v. Loop 101, LLC 341 P.3d 452 Ariz. 2014
CSA 13-101 Loop, LLC v. Loop 101, LLC 341 P.3d 452 Ariz. 2014
Co. of Wis., ¶ 15, (declining to construe an insurance statute to require a Spanish language form where other statutes explicitly require it).
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
Wilks v. Manobianco 330 P.3d 1003 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
Wilks v. Manobianco 330 P.3d 1003 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
Co. of Wis., ¶ 7 , (summary judgment and interpretation of statute reviewed de novo), we agree with the Wilkses.
Newman v. Cornerstone National Insurance 322 P.3d 194 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
Newman v. Cornerstone National Insurance 322 P.3d 194 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
Kobold v. Aetna Life Insurance 309 P.3d 924 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2013
Kobold v. Aetna Life Insurance 309 P.3d 924 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2013
Co. of Wis., ¶ 7 , (summary judgment and statutory interpretation are reviewed de novo); State Farm Mut.
Hawk v. PC Village Ass'n 309 P.3d 918 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2013
Hawk v. PC Village Ass'n 309 P.3d 918 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2013
Co. of Wis., ¶ 7 , Bertleson v. Sacks Tierney, P.A, ¶ 6
Melendez v. Hallmark Insurance 305 P.3d 392 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2013
Distinguished Melendez v. Hallmark Insurance 305 P.3d 392 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2013
§ 12-259.01 enunciated in Tallent, 185 Ariz. at 267-68 , 915 P.2d at 666-67 , -49, ¶¶ 13-14 , -97 (2011), the form here does not constitute an offer of UM/UIM coverage.
Escamilla v. cuello/cabrera 282 P.3d 403 Ariz. 2012
Escamilla v. cuello/cabrera 282 P.3d 403 Ariz. 2012
Co. of Wis., 226 Ariz. 345, 347 ¶ 7
FL Receivables Trust 2002-A v. Arizona Mills, L.L.C. 281 P.3d 1028 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2012
FL Receivables Trust 2002-A v. Arizona Mills, L.L.C. 281 P.3d 1028 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2012
Co. of Wis., ¶ 17 , (court must not rewrite statute); Rotolo v. San Jose Sports and Entm’t, LLC, 151 Cal.App.4th 307 , 59 Cal.Rptr.3d 770, 782 (2007) (rule of judicial restraint disallows court to “fill a void” in statutes, especially where legislature’s provisions are comprehensive and detailed)), v

Explore

Outcomes

Cited by