Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite Gatecliff v. Great Republic Life Insurance, 821 P.2d 725.

32 citing documents.

WAGNER v. ARIZONA MUNICIPAL Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2026
WAGNER v. ARIZONA MUNICIPAL Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2026
¶24 Wagner argues that our supreme court’s establishes direct liability for bad faith claims against “a person who intentionally and unreasonably causes an insured the denial of policy benefits .
Westcor Santan v. Az Root Bar Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
Westcor Santan v. Az Root Bar Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
Aloia v. Biological Resource Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
Aloia v. Biological Resource Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
Specialty Companies Group v. Meritage Homes Ariz. 2021
Specialty Companies Group v. Meritage Homes Ariz. 2021
Ida v. Leach Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
Ida v. Leach Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
Keg Restaurants Arizona, Inc. v. Jones 375 P.3d 1173 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
Keg Restaurants Arizona, Inc. v. Jones 375 P.3d 1173 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
DBT Yuma, L.L.C. v. Yuma County Airport Authority 340 P.3d 1080 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
DBT Yuma, L.L.C. v. Yuma County Airport Authority 340 P.3d 1080 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
Co., (setting forth elements of alter ego and instrumentality theories of vicarious liability).
Wb, the Building Company, LLC. v. El Destino 257 P.3d 1182 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2011
Wb, the Building Company, LLC. v. El Destino 257 P.3d 1182 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2011
Co., -38 , -29 (1991) (finding that, under an “alter ego” theory, a parent corporation may be held liable for the acts of its subsidiary if the two entities are so closely related that it is fair to treat them as the same entity); ¶¶ 29-31 , (App.
Moretto v. Samaritan Health System 8 P.3d 380 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2000
Moretto v. Samaritan Health System 8 P.3d 380 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2000
Taeger v. CATHOLIC FAMILY AND COMMUNITY SERVS. 995 P.2d 721 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1999
Taeger v. CATHOLIC FAMILY AND COMMUNITY SERVS. 995 P.2d 721 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1999
Co., , (citing Dietel v. Day, 16 Ariz.App.
Hilb, Rogal & Hamilton Co. of Arizona, Inc. v. McKinney 946 P.2d 464 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1997
Hilb, Rogal & Hamilton Co. of Arizona, Inc. v. McKinney 946 P.2d 464 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1997
Environmental Liners, Inc. v. Ryley, Carlock & Applewhite 930 P.2d 456 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1996
Environmental Liners, Inc. v. Ryley, Carlock & Applewhite 930 P.2d 456 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1996
Co., , (quoting Darner Motor Sales, Inc. v. Universal Underwriters 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
Horizon Resources Bethany Ltd. v. Cutco Industries, Inc. 881 P.2d 1177 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1994
Horizon Resources Bethany Ltd. v. Cutco Industries, Inc. 881 P.2d 1177 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1994
Co., , cited by Horizon, does not hold to the contrary.
Deutsche Credit Corp. v. Case Power & Equipment Co. 876 P.2d 1190 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1994
Deutsche Credit Corp. v. Case Power & Equipment Co. 876 P.2d 1190 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1994
Co., , (in parent-subsidiary case, plaintiff must prove both (1) unity of control and (2) observance of corporate form would sanction a fraud or promote injustice); Jabczenski , 119 Ariz. t 21, 579 P.2d at 59 (Two corporations can be regarded as the same if “[e]ither the dominant corporation ...