Legal Opinion

Farmers Insurance Exchange v. Call

Utah Supreme Court

Decided December 10, 1985No. 18677PublishedCited by 81 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

DURHAM, Justice:

Farmers Insurance Exchange (“Farmers”), the plaintiff in the declaratory judgment action below, seeks reversal of a summary judgment. The trial court ruled that a household exclusion clause in an automobile liability insurance policy is void as to the minimum coverage requirements of the Utah Automobile No-Fault Insurance Act (as it incorporates qualifications of insurance policies under the Utah Safety Responsibility Act), but is enforceable as to coverage in excess of those amounts. Therefore, Farmers is required to pay, defend, or indemnify the insured under the policy. The…

2Cases cited28 opinions

  1. Malan v. LewisUtah Supreme Court · 1984
  2. Mutual of Enumclaw Insurance v. WiscombWashington Supreme Court · 1982
  3. Meyer v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co.Supreme Court of Colorado · 1984
  4. Transamerica Insurance v. RoyleMontana Supreme Court · 1983
  5. Hughes v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co.North Dakota Supreme Court · 1975

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

3Cited by81 opinions

  1. Berube v. Fashion Centre, Ltd.Utah Supreme Court · 1989
  2. Salt Lake Tribune Publishing Co. v. AT & T Corp.Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2003
  3. La. Maintenance Services, Inc. v. Certain Underwriters at Lloyd's of LondonSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1993
  4. Alf v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Co.Utah Supreme Court · 1993
  5. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance v. Nationwide Mutual InsuranceCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1986

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

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

Powered by the Exa API