State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance v. Bogart
Arizona Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
FELDMAN, Justice.
We have accepted review of this declaratory judgment action to resolve an apparent conflict between “other insurance” clauses in two insurance policies. One policy contains an “escape clause” and the other an “excess clause.” Both policies are potentially applicable to the same occurrence. The trial court granted summary judgment and ordered that the loss be prorated between the two insurers in the proportion which the limits of each policy bear to the total available limits. The court of appeals reversed, giving full effect to the escape clause. State Farm Mutual Auto…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Sparks v. Republic National Life InsuranceArizona Supreme Court · 1982
- Darner Motor Sales, Inc. v. Universal Underwriters InsuranceArizona Supreme Court · 1984
- Sloviaczek v. Estate of PuckettIdaho Supreme Court · 1977
- Harbor Insurance v. United Services Automobile Ass'nCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1976
- Universal Underwriters Insurance v. Marriott Homes, Inc.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1970
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by50 opinions
- State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance v. WilsonArizona Supreme Court · 1989
- Gordinier v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co.Arizona Supreme Court · 1987
- State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance v. Enterprise Leasing Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1996
- Arizona Property & Casualty Insurance Guaranty Fund v. HerderArizona Supreme Court · 1988
- State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance v. ArringtonCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1998
45 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.