Legal Opinion

State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance v. Duran

Arizona Supreme Court

Decided November 30, 1989No. CV-89-0136-PRPublishedCited by 17 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

MOELLER, Justice.

JURISDICTION

This is an action for declaratory judgment by an automobile insurer seeking a declaration of no coverage. The trial court ruled no liability coverage existed because the vehicle involved was “furnished for regular use” of the insured, and was thus neither a “temporary substitute car” nor a “nonowned car” for purposes of liability coverage. The trial court also ruled that the “furnished for regular use” exclusion precluded underinsured coverage. The court of appeals affirmed. State Farm Mutual Auto. Ins. Co. v. Duran, 2 CA-CV 88-0237 (App. mem. dec. Feb.…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Calvert v. Farmers Ins. Co. of ArizonaArizona Supreme Court · 1985
  2. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance v. WilsonArizona Supreme Court · 1989
  3. Spain v. Valley Forge InsuranceArizona Supreme Court · 1987
  4. Employers Mutual Casualty Co. v. McKeonArizona Supreme Court · 1988
  5. Higgins v. Fireman's Fund InsuranceArizona Supreme Court · 1989

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

3Cited by17 opinions

  1. Kang v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceHawaii Supreme Court · 1991
  2. Cundiff v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceArizona Supreme Court · 2008
  3. Schultz v. Farmers Insurance Group of CompaniesArizona Supreme Court · 1991
  4. Taylor v. Travelers Indem. Co. of AmericaArizona Supreme Court · 2000
  5. Rashid v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceArizona Supreme Court · 1990

12 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