Legal Opinion

Dotson v. Estate of Pearson

Colorado Court of Appeals

Decided December 1, 1994No. 93CA1698PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Judge ROY.

Plaintiff, Trent M. Dotson, appeals the trial court’s summary judgment entered in favor of defendant, Farmers Insurance Exchange (Farmers). The trial court held that an exclusion from liability coverage for bodily injury caused to any named insured was valid under the Colorado Auto Accident Reparations Act, § 10-4-701, et seq., C.R.S. (1994 RepLVol. 4A) (No-Fault Act). We reverse.

Farmers issued an automobile insurance policy to Robert E. Pearson and Rhonda Dotson, plaintiffs wife, both of whom were “named insureds.” The named insureds were not related by blood, marriage,…

Also in this document: Concurrence.

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Meyer v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co.Supreme Court of Colorado · 1984
  2. Schlessinger v. Schlessinger Ex Rel. SchlessingerSupreme Court of Colorado · 1990
  3. Allstate Insurance Co. v. FeghaliSupreme Court of Colorado · 1991
  4. Coffman v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co.Supreme Court of Colorado · 1994
  5. Brna v. Farmers Insurance ExchangeColorado Court of Appeals · 1994

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Farmers Insurance Exchange v. DotsonSupreme Court of Colorado · 1996
  2. Farmers Insurance Exchange v. DotsonSupreme Court of Colorado · 1996
  3. Farmers Insurance Exchange v. DotsonSupreme Court of Colorado · 1996
  4. White v. Skagit Bonded Collectors LLCDistrict Court, W.D. Washington · 2022

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API